Go back to the Europarl portal

Choisissez la langue de votre document :

  • bg - български
  • es - español
  • cs - čeština
  • da - dansk
  • de - Deutsch
  • et - eesti keel
  • el - ελληνικά
  • en - English (Selected)
  • fr - français
  • ga - Gaeilge
  • hr - hrvatski
  • it - italiano
  • lv - latviešu valoda
  • lt - lietuvių kalba
  • hu - magyar
  • mt - Malti
  • nl - Nederlands
  • pl - polski
  • pt - português
  • ro - română
  • sk - slovenčina
  • sl - slovenščina
  • fi - suomi
  • sv - svenska
Parliamentary questions
PDF 39kWORD 9k
10 February 2020
Priority question for written answer
to the Commission
Rule 138
Christine Anderson
 Subject: Call by Hesse’s European Affairs Minister for a new EU Affairs Committee in response to Brexit

On 31 January 2020, Hesse’s European Affairs Minister Lucia Puttrich (CDU) published an article in the ‘Einspruch’ section of the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, criticising the ‘passivity of Germany in Europe’ and, in response to Brexit, making the following proposal: ‘The solution could, for example, lie in a joint committee of both chambers of the German Parliament, which would combine the expertise of the Bundesrat with the legitimacy of the Bundestag.’

Does the Commission likewise consider it necessary to set up another additional committee in order to remedy the alleged ‘passivity of Germany in Europe’?

In the Commission’s view, was a shortage of ‘committees’ or similar institutions, such as those proposed by Hesse’s European Affairs Minister, the main reason for Brexit, or might not the desire for national sovereignty and to escape being subject to decisions taken in Brussels rather than in the home country also have been the main reason why the British decided to leave the EU?

Since the Bundesrat is composed only of the regional governments, does the Commission consider that the proposal by Hesse’s European Affairs Minister takes sufficient account of the parliamentary opposition?

Last updated: 11 February 2020Legal notice