The committee's recommendation for a decision and report
Once the committee has discussed the bill, the rapporteurs begin the second part of their work. They submit a written report to the plenary of the Bundestag in which they present the course the discussions have taken in the committee responsible and the committees asked to give their opinions. In their report, the rapporteurs focus in particular on reasons why the committee may have deviated from the Government's bill. They are also obliged to include in the report the views of minorities who were outvoted.
The report starts with the committee's recommendation that the version of the bill agreed upon in the committee be adopted. The recommendation includes a synopsis of the amendments made by the committee to the bill. The recommendation and the report are preceded by an introductory page, as previously described. It also sets out the majority by which the bill was adopted in the committee. In the following extracts from the committee report, the voting patterns of the parliamentary groups on the Committee on Internal Affairs are shown under the section entitled "B. Solution“ of the introductory page. Number 1 sets out the voting pattern relating to the Federal Government's draft Act to Reform the Weapons Law (printed paper 14/7758). Number 2 details the voting pattern regarding a supplementary resolution on the weapons law which the Committee on Internal Affairs has recommended for adoption by the plenary, and number 3 sets out the voting pattern with regard to the Bundesrat's draft Act to Amend the Weapons Act, which the Committee on Internal Affairs also considered. The recommendation for a decision and the report appear as printed papers and are distributed to all Members of the Bundestag.
This particular recommendation from the Committee on Internal Affairs could not be drawn up in such a way that the amendments called for by the Committee were incorporated directly into the text of the recommendation submitted to the plenary. That is only possible if the Committee's amendments affect only a few points and can be presented in a brief and concise form. In such cases, the recommendation to the plenary usually states that the Bundestag is requested to "adopt the bill subject to the proviso that...“. In this case, the recommendation states that the Bundestag is requested to adopt the bill "in the form enclosed“. This applies particularly to recommendations which concern very comprehensive bills or which, as in this case, propose a large number of amendments. The Government bill and the version recommended by the committee are then set out side by side (the "synopsis“) to enable those examining them to identify which parts of the original bill should, according to the committee's recommendation, be adopted as they stand or be amended. The plenary of the Bundestag generally accepts the recommendations of the committee responsible. Therefore, contrary to what one might expect, given the division of the Bundestag into a parliamentary majority and an opposition, very few Government bills are adopted by a majority of the Members of the German Bundestag without any amendments. Rather, the Members from the ruling parties, which also form the majority on every committee, examine the bill from "their“ Government very critically and, in more than 50 per cent of cases, introduce amendments. Thus, although there is a basic political consensus between the majority parties in the Bundestag and the Government, these parties share with the opposition parties the task of exercising parliamentary scrutiny.
The committee's recommendation is followed by the committee's report which, in this case, was drawn up by five rapporteurs. The first part of the report describes the progress of committee deliberations and in particular the views of the committees asked for an opinion by the committee responsible. In our example, the report shows that two motions for amendments introduced by the CDU/CSU parliamentary group, in other words an opposition parliamentary group, were accepted. This demonstrates that committee deliberations are not dominated by conflicts between the majority and the opposition, but instead by a joint search for sensible compromises. The description of the course of the committee deliberations is followed by the reasons for the recommendation, in particular for the amendments to the Government bill recommended by the committee responsible.
This particular bill did not have any significant implications for the federal budget (see section D above). The procedure for bills which entail high public expenditure is more complex. During the first reading of such bills the Budget Committee is instructed by the plenary to investigate whether the bill is compatible with the budget situation. Unlike the comments of the committees asked for an opinion, which must first be submitted to the committee responsible, the Budget Committee's report, known as the "96 report“, after Rule 96 of the Rules of Procedure, is submitted directly to the plenary for the second reading. In the case of bills envisaging high public expenditure, the committee responsible is therefore not free to decide whether to accept or reject the reservations of the Budget Committee, as it is able to do with regard to the comments of committees asked for an opinion. It would be unacceptable for individual specialized committees to have such freedom with regard to the federal budget. Under Article 110 of the Basic Law budget revenue and expenditure must be balanced. If a bill requires an increase in expenditure which cannot be met under the current budget the plenary must ensure that cover is provided for such expenditure – the Budget Committee submits a recommendation for cover – as otherwise the bill could not be adopted. Thus, in the case of all finance bills, the Budget Committee is required to be involved in the deliberations and to submit an independent report.
Before considering the rest of the legislative process, a further point must be made about the work of the committees. The committees are not simply required to discuss bills referred to them but may discuss all matters which fall within their area of competence. Each committee therefore closely follows and monitors the policies of the particular ministry to which it corresponds. In this context, the committees of the Bundestag are sometimes said to be "co governing“ bodies. Only by dealing constantly and in detail with ministerial policy can the committees acquire the necessary specialist knowledge and political insight to enable them properly to assess individual bills or other formal motions from within the Bundestag and to process them properly. Thus, the committees do not "wait“, as it were, for bills referred to them from the plenary but deal continuously with the policies of the corresponding ministries. They devote special attention to complex and particularly controversial bills as well as to cases of error and mismanagement, should these arise.
A special role is played by the Committee on the Affairs of the European Union. It is one of the few committees which the Bundestag is required to appoint under the Basic Law (Art. 45 of the Basic Law). This is only the case for committees which have a special status and function with regard to the constitutional relationship between Parliament and Government. The Committee on the Affairs of the European Union was set up at the end of 1992 as a result of an amendment to the Basic Law involving the addition of Articles 23 and 45. Both articles were added following the signing of the Maastricht Treaty, in which the EC member states reached agreement on the further development of the European Community towards the European Union. The amendments to the Basic Law are designed to reflect the fact that Germany, like every other EU member state, is required under the Maastricht Treaty to relinquish additional sovereign rights, in other words, to transfer further legislative competences to the institutions of the European Union. The Basic Law therefore empowers the Committee on the Affairs of the European Union to exercise the Bundestag's rights in relation to the Federal Government in accordance with Article 23, where this is authorized by the Bundestag. This is a noteworthy innovation given that the other committees of the Bundestag are simply auxiliary organs of Parliament which cannot speak or take decisions on behalf of the Bundestag. This provision is designed to enable the Bundestag to influence, in a flexible way and at the appropriate stage, the formulation of political objectives by the Federal Government with regard to and within the framework of the EU institutions, to gather the necessary information and to coordinate different policy areas. The intention is to ensure the necessary parliamentary involvement in the Federal Government's contribution to EU law making and the development of EU institutions, particularly in view of the fact that the parliamentary and democratic foundations of the European Union itself are not yet fully in line with the principles of a national parliamentary representation.
The work carried out by the Committee on the Affairs of the European Union within the context of this wide ranging role, will, of course, have to be coordinated with the detailed work done by the specialized committees in the Bundestag with regard to EU legislation. There will continue to be a need for an in depth examination of regulations and directives by the specialist committees. The Committee on Economics and Labour will continue to deal with developments in European economic legislation, while developments in the fields of European social, education and environmental policy will continue to be the focus of the work of the relevant Bundestag committees. In future, however, an important task for the Bundestag will be to coordinate Germany's role with regard to the EU as a whole. Thus, this special committee has been granted a series of additional powers and a special status within the parliamentary process, set out in Rules 93 and 93a of the Rules of Procedure of the Bundestag.
