Rediscovering Europe in the Netherlands - St Antony's College ...

ediscovering europe in the netherlands
emphasised. As a result, the debate about eu policy is mainly framed in
terms of ‘more’ or ‘less’ Europe. This reinforces the impression of a Europe
obsessed by rules and provides a breeding ground for distrust among the
public. As chapter 2 has already showed, a one-sided approach that is
limited to the question of ‘more’ or ‘less’ Europe too often plays a central
role in the national political debate on Europe, while the debate on the
substantive merits of European proposals is often ignored (Pelkmans
2005). It is for this reason that the wrr has called for the establishment of a
prioritisation committee (see chapter 3).
Secondly, the Subsidiarity Committee is itself likely to become part of the
‘technocratic cocoon’, as it is somewhat hidden away in Parliament. Moreover,
the Committee has already rejected a number of new eu policy
proposals, but there is still no sign that the Committee’s activities are
having much impact on the media or the public.
96
However, subsidiarity testing is extremely convenient for politicians who
want to stress the ‘us’ versus ‘them’ approach. Subsidiarity testing, on the
one hand, can thus be an important tool for protecting national interests.
However, on the other hand, it can offer a platform for politicians to
promote a common approach to problems concerning the environment
(e.g., reducing co2 emissions), security (e.g., human trafficking) and the
securing of energy supplies. Employing the subsidiarity principle as an
instrument to erect a barricade against European interference would thus
be wrong; it may just as well end up leading to exactly the opposite effect,
namely a more comprehensive role for the eu.
The Subsidiarity Committee thus has some potential for contributing to
new forms of representation and accountability (by binding the actions of
ministers to the opinions of the Committee). It may also offer opportunities
for allowing a better match between Dutch preferences and substantive
eu policy to emerge. Much depends, however, on the remittance and
actual functioning of the Subsidiarity Committee. Surely, the visibility of
its activities deserves attention, but the primary requirement – if it is to
make a real contribution to the legitimisation of eu policy in the Netherlands
– is that the Committee goes beyond its one-sided mandate (i.e., the
question of ‘European or national policy’). The recommendation of the
wrr for the transformation of the Committee into a ‘prioritisation
committee’ is based on this premise (see chapter 3).
Red lines
The substantive debate has definitely been the central focus in a second
type of political safeguards, known as ‘red lines’. These are boundaries or