The European Commission had become one of the more contentious actors during both Irish referenda on the Lisbon Treaty. This book discusses the role of the European Commission and institutions more generally, as well as the policy area of justice and home affairs. It argues that it is important to evaluate the role of EU institutions for the process of European integration. The book suggests a reconceptualisation of the framework of supranational policy entrepreneurs (SPEs), which is often referred to by the academic literature that discusses the role of agency in European integration. It focuses on the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice (AFSJ) at the policy and treaty levels; primarily on four grounds: academic literature, SPE behaviour, EU's policymaking, and the interplay between treaty negotiations and policy-making. To analyse the role of the European institutions, the book combines an analysis of the Lisbon Treaty in relation to the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice with an analysis of the policy-making in the same area. The public policy model by John Kingdon with constructivist international relations literature is also outlined. The external dimension of counter-terrorism in the EU; the role of the EU institutions in EU asylum and migration; and the role of he Common European Asylum System (CEAS) is discussed. The book also analyses the role of the EU institutions in the communitarisation of the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice, in the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe, and thus subsequently in the Lisbon Treaty.
The first European Union's (EU) enlargement of the twenty-first century coincides with a period of international tension and transition. Tensions have been apparent over: the war in Iraq, the 'War on Terror', immigration, organised crime, ethnic confrontation, human rights, energy resources and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction (WMD). The EU has made genuine progress in developing its security policies since the launch of the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) and Justice and Home Affairs (JHA) in the Treaty on European Union (TEU). This book examines the impact that enlargement will have on leadership within the EU, a pre-requisite for policy coherence. It focuses on what has been Europe's most significant region in terms of security challenges and international responses since the end of the Cold War: the Balkan. The book provides an overview of the foreign policy priorities and interests of the new member states (NMS), highlighting areas of match and mismatch with those of the EU fifteen. Counter-terrorism has emerged from the shadows of the EU's Third Pillar, and has been propelled to the forefront of the EU's internal agenda, driven by the demands of the 'War on Terror'. The book discusses the core elements of the EU's emerging common external border management, with a focus on the creation of the EU's new External Borders Agency and the Schengen Borders Code. While the first two are declarative partnership and declarative negativism, the last two reflect the struggle between pragmatism and Soviet-style suspicion of Western bureaucrats.
( JHA). This approach has two distinct advantages. Firstly, by considering the entirety of the period – from 1992 through to 2007 (the last year with full statistical
information available at the time of writing) – rather than simply the post-11
September reaction, a fairer and more accurate picture of EU activity is produced
and therefore a more accurate assessment of what the EU contributes can be
ascertained. For example, some commentators and officials have tried to argue
that, when considering the development of the European Police Office
Henderson, Back to Europe: Central and Eastern Europe and the European Union (London:
Taylor and Francis, 1999).
For details, see Justice and HomeAffairs Council, Convention based on Article K.3 of the
Treaty on European Union, on the Establishment of a European Police Office on 26 July 1995
Cyrille Fijnaut cited in Ferruccio Pastore, ‘The European Union and the fight against terrorism’, in Ferruccio Pastore et al., Is there a European Strategy Against Terrorism? (Rome: CeSPI,
2005), p. 9.
European Commission, Developing a Comprehensive and
Council and the
Commission on How Best to Implement the Provisions of the Treaty of
Amsterdam on [the] Area of Freedom, Security and Justice’,
January 1999, Official Journal of the European Communities ,
J. Monar, ‘Justice and HomeAffairs in a
Wider Europe: The Dynamics of
Does European integration contribute to, or even accelerate, the erosion of intra-party democracy? This book is about improving our understanding of political parties as democratic organisations in the context of multi-level governance. It analyses the impact of European Union (EU) membership on power dynamics, focusing on the British Labour Party, the French Socialist Party (PS), and the German Social Democratic Party (SPD). The purpose of this book is to investigate who within the three parties determines EU policies and selects EU specialists, such as the candidates for European parliamentary elections and EU spokespersons. The book utilises a principal-agent framework to investigate the delegation of power inside the three parties across multiple levels and faces. It draws on over 65 original interviews with EU experts from the three national parties and the Party of European Socialists (PES) and an e-mail questionnaire. This book reveals that European policy has largely remained in the hands of the party leadership. Its findings suggest that the party grassroots are interested in EU affairs, but that interest rarely translates into influence, as information asymmetry between the grassroots and the party leadership makes it very difficult for local activists to scrutinise elected politicians and to come up with their own policy proposals. As regards the selection of EU specialists, such as candidates for the European parliamentary elections, this book highlights that the parties’ processes are highly political, often informal, and in some cases, undemocratic.
The Emergency Hospital Services in Second World War Northern Ireland
disease hospitals, mental health institutions and sanatoriums. The
Ministry of HomeAffairs, whose remit included judicial and policing
responsibilities, was the central government body that oversaw all
local authorities. The lack of a government department solely for
health and welfare, such as Britain's Ministry of Health or
the Irish Free State's Department of Local Government and
-operation and therefore to building both greater
credibility and legitimacy in this area.
1 House of Commons, Foreign Affairs Aspects of the Lisbon Treaty – Testimony of Professor
Richard Whitman to the Third Report of the Foreign Affairs Select Committee on 21 November
2007 (London: Hansard, 2007).
2 Peter Chalk, ‘The Third Pillar on Judicial and HomeAffairs Co-operation, Anti-Terrorism
collaboration and Liberal Democratic Acceptability’ in Fernando Reinares (ed.), European
Democracies against Terrorism: Government Policies and Inter-Governmental Co
there has been an implicit recognition that a twenty-five state forum
may not be the ideal vehicle for ensuring progress. It is within this
context that the latest institutional grouping – the G5 meetings
of the HomeAffairs and Interior Ministers from France, Germany, Italy,
Spain and the UK – and the latest Treaty development – the
2005 Treaty of Prum – have to be understood. In the
’ Division of the USC in November
1921 in the event of the Anglo-Irish Truce breaking down, as by this time
sufﬁcient numbers of modern riﬂes had not been secured in Great
Britain to arm the entire force. At this time, the riﬂes were being stored
with their bolts removed, which rendered them unserviceable.68
Arms, equipment and finance
Already by 1922 the UVF weapons remaining in government storage
(now transferred from the War Ofﬁce to the Ministry of HomeAffairs of
the new Northern Ireland government) were something of an
embarrassment. Writing in June 1922