Suchergebnisse

"This book offers a comprehensive overview of the role of parliamentary administrations in the control of European Union policy-making. It questions whether the decision to give parliaments greater powers in the aftermath of the Lisbon Treaty had only the intended effect of political debate on European policies, or whether it has also resulted in the bureaucratisation of parliaments. The authors argue that the challenges of information-management faced by parliaments lead them to delegate an extensive set of tasks to their administrations. They offer a broad empirical picture, analysing the challenges faced by national parliaments and the role and response of their administrations in the case of the European Parliament, national parliaments and regional parliaments. In addition, the book studies the interaction between different administrations and their contribution to interparliamentary cooperation. It presents a new and different perspective on the challenges and dynamics of multi-level parliamentarism"--

"The Routledge Handbook of Parliamentary Administrations brings together an international, multidisciplinary group of contributors providing a systematic and comprehensive analysis of parliamentary administrations. Including chapters on the administrations of national parliaments in every member state of the European Union, in most of the EU candidate countries and in key liberal democracies around the world, this book represents a uniquely broad-ranging resource. Each national system is treated in a consistent manner, with authors providing relevant facts, figures, and critical analysis according to a common framework. Additionally, it provides coverage of transnational parliamentary administrations in different regions around the globe and includes a number of cross-cutting chapters, addressing key issues of relevance for a better understanding of parliamentary administrations such as the potential for politicisation, professionalisation, digitalisation or Europeanisation with the comparative analysis of different national experiences. This handbook will enable readers to better comprehend the role and influence of parliamentary administrations and in doing so will enhance our understanding of their importance for the effective functioning of representative democracy more generally. The Routledge Handbook of Parliamentary Administrations constitutes a unique tool and prime reference for any researcher, scholar or practitioner working in the area of parliamentary and legislative studies, governance, democracy, public policy and administration, as well as more widely to European studies, general political science and comparative politics"--

Abstract
When it comes to information services for citizens, one usually thinks first of those on site – guided tours, events, visitor centres and certainly also online services. The fact that many parliaments and their administrations also offer classic enquiry services is often forgotten, although these are an important offer to citizens. Not least, the massive increase in the workload of the Enquiry Service of the Parliamentary Administration, due to the Corona pandemic and the new digital consultation process on bills established in August 2021, was an occasion to reconsider in an in-depth and structured manner the tasks of a parliamentary citizens' service. The following report summarizes this reflection process.

Abstract
Parliamentary administration is integral to supporting the work of elected politicians. How is it held to account? This article focuses on parliamentary questions—one means of scrutinizing parliamentary administration. The article uses a qualitative analysis of written and oral questions MPs have asked the House of Commons Commission (the body responsible for parliamentary administration). It asks three sub-questions: (1) Who asks the questions?; (2) What questions are asked?; and (3) How are these questions answered? Interrogating these questions also provides a window into the internal governance challenges of the House of Commons.

Gradually emerged in England in the aftermath of the struggle between the House of Commons and the Crown, parliamentarism has widely circulated abroad, has been praised by many for its alleged capacity to resist authoritarianism, and is mainly concentrated in Europe as well as in former UK colonies. Likewise, presidentialism, originated for the first time from the US Constitution of 1787, is not a monolithic category. Committees, in particular the permanent ones, have famously been labelled as the "backbones" of legislatures. In law-making, the strength of committees is what defines the strength of a parliamentary institution, in terms of capacity to shape the content of legislation and to oversee the executive. In presidential regimes, the capacity of the Parliament to influence the budget seems higher, also due to the lack of confidence votes to be used by the executive as a leverage to pressure the legislature on budgetary procedures.

Past research has identified a trend towards the bureaucratisation of the parliamentary scrutiny of EU affairs. It highlighted the role of parliamentary staff in selecting relevant issues, advising on subsidiarity and procedures and drafting of opinions and resolutions. However, while administrators clearly play a role, less is known about the Europeanisation of parliamentary administrations. In particular, the impact of the growing Europeanisation of sectoral committees on the Europeanisation of staff is unexplored. This article presents data from a survey of parliamentary administrations in 2021, which shows that the Europeanisation of parliamentary administrations extends beyond the main units in charge of EU affairs and affects sectoral committee staff more generally. At the same time, it reveals that the organisation of staff support for EU affairs varies greatly across the national parliaments depending on the organisation of the political scrutiny, on administrative capacity and on pre-existing units.

National parliaments tend to delegate a range of tasks related to EU affairs scrutiny to their administrations. However, there is considerable variation in the extent to which national parliaments invest in EU affairs staff. This raises two questions: what is the source of this diversity, and what is its impact on the EU affairs scrutiny of national parliaments? This paper argues that greater investments in EU affairs staff are associated with public Euroscepticism, large parliaments and parliaments with strong scrutiny powers. A large EU staff is, in turn, associated with parliaments that are relatively active in EU affairs scrutiny. This is particularly true for the 15 EU member states that joined before 2004.