Abstract

Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) have a multitude of parliamentary duties and, accordingly, have to prioritize some parliamentary activities over others. So far, we know comparably little about this prioritization process. Based on principal–agent theory, we argue first, that MEPs’ parliamentary activities are systematically determined by the “visibility” and usefulness of parliamentary instruments for their key principal; second, we expect the exclusiveness of candidate selection procedures of an MEP’s national party—the nomination and the final list placement—to determine her/his key principal (i.e., elites or members of national parties). Combining multi-level mixed effects linear regression models and expert interviews, we show that MEPs who are nominated and whose final list placement is decided by an exclusive circle of national party elites prioritize speeches, whereas MEPs who are nominated or whose final list placement is decided by more inclusive procedures prioritize written questions and opinions or reports. In other words, speeches seem particularly useful to communicate with national party elites, while other activities are used to serve larger groups of party members. These findings open up the black-box of the “national party principal” and illustrate how a complex principal–agent relationship stimulates very specific parliamentary activity patterns in the EU’s multi-level system.

Highlights

  • Legislators have a large number of duties but only a limited amount of time

  • We expect the following: Expectation 1: The more exclusive the candidate selection process for European elections within a national political party, the more likely it becomes that MEPs prioritize speeches over other parliamentary activities

  • The question of how European legislators deal with multiple principals and a variety of parliamentary tasks is highly interesting because it concerns central standards of modern democracies, namely political representation and responsiveness

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Legislators have a large number of duties but only a limited amount of time. they have to prioritize some parliamentary activities over others. Which specific interests an MEP wants to serve is determined by two components of the candidates selectin procedure: (1) the nomination of candidates; and (2) the decision over the final list placement of candidates Both components have an effect into the same direction, and their combination determines the overall effect size of candidate selection procedures on MEPs’ prioritization strategy in terms of parliamentary activities. We explore this novel argument based on a new and comprehensive dataset that includes four important but very different parliamentary activities (i.e., speeches, written questions, written opinions, and reports) of all MEPs, their personal characteristics and offices within the 7th legislative period of the EP (2009–2014), as well as expert interviews.

Prioritization of Parliamentary Activities in a Multi-Level Setting
Empirical Analysis
Reports
40 Members
Findings
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call