Its defenders might argue that the Parliament does have the power to offer amendments and revisions to laws in talks with the Council and the Commission. But the “trilogue” (it sounds like something on offer at a Belgian swingers’ club, but actually refers to the negotiating process between the Parliament and the Council with the Commission) is only a weak substitute for real legislative might.
The Parliament is ultimately the slave of the Commission, which itself is slave to the Council, i.e. the bloc’s member states. EU Parliament debates may be full of sound and fury, but in the end its deputies hew to their national consensus on the big issues.
When that consensus changes, such as on the European Green Deal package of climate measures, the Parliament follows suit. Consider the recent decision to phase out the internal combustion engine in 2035: After years of talks, the decision was endorsed last year by the Commission, the Parliament and the Council.
Now, however, Germany’s center-right CDU, which is likely to regain power next year, is campaigning against phasing out polluting cars, putting the future of the switch to electric in question. Under the slogan “Germany must remain the land of the automobile,” the CDU recently launched an (unscientific) online poll with one question: “Do you support the demand to reverse the ban of fuel-power cars?” (Strictly speaking, under an EU plan agreed last year, the internal combustion engine won’t be “banned;” instead, starting in 2035, car buyers will only be allowed to register new vehicles that are “carbon neutral.”)
Germany’s center-right CDU is likely to regain power next year. | Ina Fassabender/Getty Images
In the final analysis, what the EU Parliament wants won’t matter if Germany, Europe’s most powerful country, decides it no longer supports the move.
Such episodes explain why many voters, even if they don’t understand how the Parliament works, do grasp that they can safely ignore it. The sad thing is that they’re right.