The Lisbon Treaty

Answer

The European nations signed the Lisbon treaty in 2007 but it became operational in December 2009. Accordingly, they signed the treaty to amend the previous two agreements that had established the European Union. The Lisbon treaty amends the Treaty of Rome and the Maastricht Treaty and their protocols alongside the treaty that creates the European Atomic energy community (Ziller, 2019). The Lisbon treaty had the objective of facilitating the efficiency of the processes that the Amsterdam treaty and the treaty of Nice had put in place. However, those who opposed the Lisbon treaty believed that it would centralize power and destroy the democratic ideals of the Union by undermining the national electorates. The quest to modify the union had began in 2001 when members negotiated a proposed European constitution that would replace the treaties, but the move failed because majority of voters in respective nations rejected the move (Sodersten et al., 2019). The most important change that the Lisbon treaty established was the empowerment of the European parliament as co-legislator with the council, making it important for reasons discussed in the subsequent paragraphs.

            First, the change was important because it improved democratic ideals within the organization. Accordingly, the European council which is the main policy and political decision maker for the organization must consult with the European parliament before they can implement any decision (Ziller, 2019). It gives the European parliament the opportunity to debate such policy and political decision before voting on the same. The move takes away the much discretionary powers that the council previously enjoyed in making such political directions. Thanks to the Lisbon treaty, the council cannot now act unilaterally because the union parliament must discuss any such move and they have the powers to veto or approve (Bevir and Philips, 2017). Accordingly, it creates a system of checks and balances where the two arms of the union check one another to reduce possibility of abuse of discretionary powers.

            The Change also brought power closer to the people to participate on the Union affairs. Previously, the European council which consists of non-elected members would make unilateral decisions and the citizens would have little control over decisions that affect them in one way or the other. However, by making the European parliament a co-legislator with the council, European citizens now have the ability to contribute through their directly elected representative (Ziller, 2019). Moreover, the European parliament is directly answerable to the people and not the council. Since it is the people who elect the parliament`s membership, they are likely to act in the people`s best interest. It makes democracy better because with the possibility of petitioning the elected representatives, such European parliament would not submit to the authority of the European council but to the people`s interests (Bevir and Philips, 2017). Consequently, making the European parliament a co-legislator with the European council increased citizen participation in the European union affairs and thus ensuring that the union listens to the people`s voices.

            Making the European parliament a co-legislator with the European council promotes transparency and accountability. It gives the union parliament the powers to oversee how the council formulates it policy decisions and how it spends on those policies (Ziller, 2019). The benefit is that the union retains more money due to such oversight by ensuring that both institutions use their budget reasonable and transparently. Also, it leads to proper service delivery since each arm makes the other to be on their feet due to the system of checks and balances between them (Bevir and Phillips, 2017). The ripple effect is that the European citizens would get proper services and decisions from both the council and the union. Such realities make the decision to make the council and parliament co-legislators the best outcome of the Lisbon treaty.

            In conclusion, this essay evaluates the Lisbon treaty and their outcomes on the governance of the European union. Accordingly, it argues that making European parliament a co-legislator with the council is the most important outcome of the Lisbon treaty. First, the essay argues that such move fostered accountability and transparency in the activities of both institutions due to checks and balances. The two arms would check how each functioned hence improving service delivery. It also promoted democracy by enhancing public participation through parliamentary debates of the union`s Council`s decisions. Also, the decision brought power closer to the people and improved public participation.