Number of subsidiarity 27 out of a possible 39 32 out of a possible 39 checks performed chambers performed a chambers performed a subsidiarity check subsidiarity check, though not all on time Coordination with other 17 out of 27 chambers 16 out of 32 chambers national parliaments reported cooperation, reported cooperation, mainly through the IPEX mainly through the IPEX website and permanent website and permanent representatives at the EP representatives at the EP Communications sent by Mostly brief and formal Mostly brief and formal, the EC without a statement of though more seriously assurance that further addresses suggestions and action will be taken. Does states that these will be address concerns and explored further answers questions Changes made in proposals None formally admitted, None formally admitted, after receiving opinions according to the permanent but EC communications do from national parliaments representatives these are indicate that changes can hard to trace be made through Council debates Number of proposals None, not yet happened in None, not yet happened in annulled practice because of practice because of entry into force of relevant into force of relevant protocol in December 2009 protocol in December 2009 Table 4.1. Indicators: outcomes. 4.1.1. Similarities The proposals have similar impact assessments. They both consider a range of different options, including the status quo, they both explain these options and offer a reasoning why the option chosen is the best one. The subsidiarity statements flowing from these impact assessments are not too different, for they follow the same reasoning. They both argue that the scope is too big for member states to take sole action, which necessitates EU or Community action. The national parliaments or chambers scrutinizing these statements and the proposals as a whole, report in both cases an interparliamentary cooperation rate that is about the same. In the subsidiarity check for COM(2008) 818 17 out of 27 parliaments indicated that they have cooperated and for COM(2009) 338 16
Number of subsidiarity checks performed 27 out of a possible 39 chambers performed a subsidiarity check 32 out of a possible 39 chambers performed a subsidiarity check, though not all on time Coordination with other national parliaments 17 out of 27 chambers reported cooperation, mainly through the IPEX website and permanent representatives at the EP 16 out of 32 chambers reported cooperation, mainly through the IPEX website and permanent representatives at the EP Communications sent by the EC Mostly brief and formal without a statement of assurance that further action will be taken. Does address concerns and answers questions Mostly brief and formal, though more seriously addresses suggestions and states that these will be explored further Changes made in proposals after receiving opinions from national parliaments None formally admitted, according to the permanent representatives these are hard to trace None formally admitted, but EC communications do indicate that changes can be made through Council debates Number of proposals annulled None, not yet happened in practice because of into force of relevant protocol in December 2009 None, not yet happened in practice because of entry into force of relevant protocol in December 2009 Table 4.1. Indicators: outcomes. 4.1.1. Similarities The proposals have similar impact assessments. They both consider a range of different options, including the status quo, they both explain these options and offer a reasoning why the option chosen is the best one. The subsidiarity statements flowing from these impact assessments are not too different, for they follow the same reasoning. They both argue that the scope is too big for member states to take sole action, which necessitates EU or Community action. The national parliaments or chambers scrutinizing these statements and the proposals as a whole, report in both cases an interparliamentary cooperation rate that is about the same. In the subsidiarity check for COM(2008) 818 17 out of 27 parliaments indicated that they have cooperated and for COM(2009) 338 16
Rijk.docx