OpenLobby.EU
Explore

Arbeitsgemeinschaft berufsständischer Versorgungseinrichtungen e.V.

ABV

Förderung und Wahrung der Interessen berufsständischer Versorgungseinrichtungen der verkammerten Freien Berufe in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland

Lobbying Activity

Response to More efficient law-making in social policy: identification of areas for an enhanced move to qualified majority voting

16 Jan 2019

Regarding the exceptional importance of European social policy, ABV is particularly concerned about an appropriate design of decision making processes at EU level in this area. As the umbrella organisation of the German pension schemes for liberal professions we strongly point out that it is of fundamental importance that the core competence of the Member States in the field of social security is preserved and will be maintained. We think that far-reaching decisions which substantially affect the social situation of EU citizens have to be made very carefully and well-considered. Therefore, it is necessary that law-making processes are democratic procedures allowing adequate participation. And there should be no doubt that it is more relevant that a decision making process is democratic than ‘efficient’. The EU citizens will judge the legitimation of decisions made at EU level with regard to the underlying democratic procedure rather than to any parameters of ‘efficiency’. The Treaties stipulate explicitly that very sensitive areas such as the field of social security require unanimous decisions, Article 153 (2) TFEU. This regulation is in perfect accordance with the principle of subsidiarity in the sector of social policy as it is set out in Articles 151, 153 TFEU. With great clarity it is pointed out that ‘the diverse forms of national practices’ have to be taken into account and that the Union shall only ‘support and complement the activities of the Member States’. Furthermore ‘the right of Member States to define the fundamental principles of their social security systems’ and ‘the financial equilibrium thereof’ must not be impaired. ABV believes that the design of decision-making processes as it is de lege lata enshrined in the Treaties is already very thoughtfully balanced. Thus we see no valid reason to depart from the given setting.
Read full response