DISCLAIMER: This article contains the personal views of the author and should not be inferred to be the views of Unlock Democracy.

The European Parliament
Richard Corbett, Francis Jacobs and Michael Shackleton
John Harper (2007)

This thorough textbook offers a clear and careful analysis of the formation and functioning of the European Parliament. The prose is clear and accessible, or at least as much so as is possible given that it’s subject matter is the frequently cheerfully Kafkaesque internal workings of the European Union. For the student of the EU it is hard to fault as an introductory guidebook. For the general reader it offers a well-organised body of information about just about every aspect of the European Parliament, although the odds of most readers ploughing through the book from cover to cover are rather slim. The book is in its 7th edition and is, basically, the official guide to the European Parliament. One of its authors, Richard Corbett, is himself an MEP for the British Labour Party. It carries an endorsement from the President of the European Parliament on the back cover.

The authors take it as a central aim of the book to present the achievements of the Parliament in a good light. This slant is, however, made quite explicit from the outset of the book and no attempt is made to pull the wool over the determined Eurosceptic’s eyes. With the vast majority of the book’s 370 pages being made up of a meticulously detailed and balanced account of the history and workings of the Parliament, the sceptic will find plenty of ammunition to throw at the institution.

The central point of the authors’ positive evaluation of the European Parliament is that, unlike in many other legislatures, its members spend a great deal of time actually drawing up and amending legislation. The authors readily admit that the cut and thrust of debate is somewhat limited by the fact that there is no executive representative who is forced to propose and defend their government’s actions within the Parliament, as well as the fact that verbal flourishes are somewhat diminished by the fact that debates must be translated into the parliament’s 23 official languages. However, they present a compelling case that the Parliament does a very thorough job of carefully scrutinising legislation in committee, going through bills line by line, adding amendments and doing its best to form a consensus from the myriad competing interests of MEPs from across Europe. Prime Minister’s Question Time may offer far better political theatre, but that somewhat obscures the fact that the actual legislative impact of most back bench MPs at Westminster – in particular those in the opposition – is often virtually nil. This is not the case in the European Parliament, where nearly all members can, realistically, have a significant impact upon the making of laws.

The overall impression of the Parliament which the authors give you is that of a well meaning and considerate organisation which moves at geological pace. Throughout the book they describe how a dull yet very important political issue will be raised in the Parliament, mulled over in committee for a few decades and then, when all possible points of view have been considered, a consensus will be arrived at, which, after another few years, becomes effective law across the EU. The impression this gives you, with regard to the Constitutional Treaty debate, is that whether or not it passes is somewhat incidental. If it passes then it passes. If it does not, then the same changes are likely to be passed piecemeal without it over the next few years regardless. It is rather difficult to halt continental drift.

The other major point in favour of the Parliament which the authors bring out is that it is the only directly, democratically elected element of the European Union’s political system. The EU has a great deal of power and the Parliament is the only element of the system over which all of the citizens have a roughly equal say, be they from Luxembourg, Romania or the UK. This is very important and it is clear that it is this unique moral claim which the Parliament can make, to be composed of the direct representative of people of Europe, which has allowed it to steadily gain power and influence within the EU as time has gone by.

The book is substantially livened up by the amount of often bizarre trivia which it contains. It is, for instance, intriguing to learn that British MPs receive a 20p per mile bicycle allowance for reaching parliament by that means, while MEPs receive no reimbursement whatsoever for travel by the same means. Similarly, breaks from the usual well ordered drive towards reasonable consensus are detailed with some relish by the authors, with the “Order in the chamber” section being of particular interest in this regard. It contains what is probably the best sentence in the book: “This power was used against a Portuguese member, Rosado, who hit a Danish member, Blak, in December 1997 after a vigorous exchange in a debate on tobacco subsidies.” Jean-Marie Le Pen also continually appears and reappears throughout the book like some kind of pantomime villain, only to be variously condemned, vetoed and ignored by his fellow MEPs.

If a single criticism could be made of the book it is that so little space is devoted to the issue of lobbying. Lobbyists are generally acknowledge to be a major force in US politics, with groups such as the National Rifle Association holding a great deal of sway over the legislative process in Washington. Brussels is rapidly becoming second only to Washington as a centre for lobbyists and some more analysis of their impact on the workings of the European Parliament would have been much appreciated.

In sum, if you wish to learn about the European Parliament and how it fits in with the rest of the European Union, it is hard to think of a better place to start than with this book. It is a rigorous academic text written in a clear and accessible style.