Dr. Sonia Piedrafita:

Many national parliaments, such as the Spanish Parliament, do not send a reasoned opinion unless it is negative. According to law, that is how it should be done as unless there is a breach in a principle, there is no need to send a reasoned opinion. Sometimes the Commission does not get enough reasoned opinions because although national parliaments undertake scrutiny, they may not find a breach.

As far as political dialogue is concerned, many member states still lag behind and they could be sending more comment to the Commission. Engagement in dialogue may come too late and there may no time to ask questions or become more informed, for example, in issuing a report on proposals.

Sometimes it is a matter of time. However, there is still a great deal to do, and that would be very useful.

The legislative proposal by the Commission that is now in the legislative procedure negotiations is about EU-wide political parties, not national parties. That is a legislative proposal, and it is only about European Union political parties. The other initiative is an own initiative by the European Parliament. It is not EU law in a strict sense. That contains a recommendation both for European political parties and for national parties. The European Parliament is asking national parties to make it clear which European parties they belong to, so citizens can associate the party with the European political party and the debate goes from domestic issues to the European sphere, and also which candidate for the Commission the party will support in case that European political party wins the elections to the European Parliament.

I already referred to the importance of being aware of the annual work programme of the Commission. I am aware that in this Parliament there are staff dealing with that and looking at the work programme when it is published. It is a very good way to establish priorities for the scrutiny that will come afterwards, because national parliaments cannot scrutinise all EU law and all EU documents. It is very useful to look at the work programme and establish the priorities on which the national parliament will work. It is also good to try to find a way to influence that annual work programme before it is issued. There are means through which the national governments of member states could do that in a previous phase. It is essential that individual Commissioners continue their work and make a bigger effort to come to national parliaments to explain what their DGs are doing. That is part of the political dialogue. It was institutionalised as part of the political dialogue started in 2006 and it should continue. It is really useful, not only for members of national parliaments but also for citizens because if a Commissioner comes here, the media will probably also come here and European Union affairs will be in the press as well. That is very positive for democratic legitimacy and for political accountability.