The Eurozone has exited recession and there are positive indications of progress in countries such as Ireland, Portugal and Spain; but the report Euro Area Crisis: An Update (HL 163) concludes that the Eurozone remains weak and vulnerable. Despite some countries showing signs of recovery, the report finds that fundamental weaknesses still exist such as: poor growth; huge differences in prosperity between Member States destructively high levels of unemployment; and growing fears of a deflationary spiral. These weaknesses leave the Eurozone extremely vulnerable to future shocks. The Committee also repeats its warning to the Government that the UK is becoming increasingly isolated as the euro area knits closer together. In order to ensure the UK's interests are effectively promoted, the Government and the Bank of England should maintain and develop constructive relationships with the increasingly

In the wake of the euro crisis, the European Union has been transformed in many ways. Is it now on the right track? The euro crisis, the steps taken to manage it, and the resulting transformations have triggered a necessary process of reconsidering economic governance in the European Union. This volume— the third in a series of annual editions tackling different aspects of governance— examines the long list of open political, legal, and economic questions related to the functioning and fundamental structure of the Union as a whole and the economic and monetary union in particular. Organised in three main sections, the contributions to this collection bring the perspectives of different academic disciplines to bear on the functional aspects of economic governance, the institutional transformations that have taken place, and their implications for the Union's legitimacy. A separate chapter looks at inequalities in perceptions of economic conditions and well-being within the European Union to identify trends particularly during the eurozone crisis. In doing so, the chapters in this volume take stock of the current situation, shed light on the dilemmas and challenges that must be recognised and addressed, and explore various options for the way ahead. The collection's ultimate goal is to assess whether the recent transformations lead EU governance in the right direction or require further adjustment.

This report provides an overview of the work of the European Union Committee in session 2013-14. It highlights some of the key policies examined through scrutiny work and inquiries, reflects on the Committee's work with the EU institutions and other national parliaments, and gives a forward look at the work being undertaken in session 2014-15.

Few events over the past few decades have given rise to an amount of debate and speculation concerning the state of the European Union (EU) and the future of European integration as the economic and financial crisis that began in 2007. In spite of substantial media, policy-making and academic attention, the fundamental questions of why and how the euro area (EA) has remained not only intact but also expanded and integrated further during the crisis require deeper theoretical investigation. One needs to understand not only the economics but also the politics and institutions of the crisis. A lack of such an understanding is the reason why a number of observers, at least initially, had a hard time making sense of policy-makers’ decisions (and pace thereof), including why the EA did not implode as some predicted. Economic theories provide a certain perspective for why the crisis occurred and what economic policies were and are needed to resolve it; however, they fail to capture the deeper roots and management of the crisis. In order to improve our understanding of a discussion that has oscillated between fears of EA disintegration on the one hand and the concrete advancement of integration during the crisis on the other, this special collection brings together leading scholars of European integration who apply key theoretical approaches – from liberal intergovernmentalism and neofunctionalism to other prominent theoretical accounts that have been applied to European integration such as historical institutionalism, critical political economy, normative theory, and a public opinion approach – to the economic and financial crisis. The contributions seek to analyse, understand and/or explain the events that occurred and the (re)actions to them in order to draw conclusions concerning the applicability and usefulness of their respective theoretical perspectives. This book was published as a special issue of the Journal of European Public Policy.

Europe faces an increasingly unstable and dangerous neighbourhood. The continuing war in Syria, a humanitarian crisis in the region and the weakening of state structures have created a combustible environment, which has contributed to the refugee and migration crisis and the rise of the so-called Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL). Meanwhile, the conflict in eastern Ukraine appears to have become frozen, and relations with Russia are dominated by sanctions. In such a moment of uncertainty and upheaval, the discipline of developing a new strategy is welcome. First and foremost, a new EU foreign and security strategy must be underpinned by the recognition that the driving force in foreign policy is the Member States: it must provide the overarching framework for how Member States can act more collectively, and offer them the political framework to act within and through the EU. A new strategy for the EU must undertake a forthright process of prioritisation, agreed by the Member States. It should set out where the EU should act, and take into account what means it has at its disposal. It must be driven by a sober assessment of the risks facing the Union, its security interests therein and a clear-sighted analysis of the resources the Union can bring to bear.

A definitive reassessment of the constitutional, economic, institutional and judicial dimensions of the EU internal market, including Brexit.

Is the European Union still a viable project? The last few years have been difficult both economically and politically, while its integrative function and legitimacy have been seriously tested. For many social, economic and geo-political reasons, its expansionary moment has stopped abruptly. On the contrary, the Greek economic crisis and the Brexit referendum have raised the spectre of fragmentation and political disintegration. The promise of the EU as a possible model for legitimate governance beyond the nation state lies somewhat in tatters. Even if the EU may indeed survive most of its current crises, is the project of a EU as a normative project beyond rescue? Ever since Maastricht, the democratic legitimacy of the EU has been a key concern of policy makers, citizens and academics alike. This issue is essentially a normative one, and over the same period our work in this area has been at the forefront in exploring what has come to be known (following an early working paper we wrote with this title in 2000) 'the normative turn in EU studies'. The debate on the democratic form and legitimacy of the EU is one that has gone on for some time and to which we, together with other scholars, have tried to contribute in the course of the last twenty years or so. Collecting articles written over the course of this period is not just meant as the testimony of an intellectual journey, but also a way of tracing such a journey in retrospect and mapping the important moments of the intellectual and scholarly debates that have contributed to shaping both our understanding and our expectations of the EU's possible futures.

With the rate of young jobless in the EU still at nearly double its pre-crisis level, and the UK experiencing exceptionally high levels of unemployment, this report calls on the Government to rethink the way it uses European funding. The Government needs to use EU money to support the introduction of a Youth Guarantee, rather than putting the funds towards existing domestic measures such as the Youth Contract. The Youth Contract had underperformed and was not popular in the private sector, while the Youth Guarantee had been successful in other European countries. Five regions in the UK were highlighted in the report as having unemployment levels so high that they qualified for additional EU funding. These areas were: Tees Valley & Durham; West Midlands; South Western Scotland; Inner London; and Merseyside. The Committee is urging the Government use the European funding to run pilot Youth Guarantee schemes in these five areas. Other recommendations made in the report include: a move away from a centralised management of EU funds and make the most of local authorities and Local Enterprise Partnerships, who have links to specialist organisations in their areas; when it comes to careers advice, the Government should use EU money to fund more traditional face-to-face careers advice, rather than focusing on online support; and more needs to be done to address the skills mismatch in the EU - a particular example being in ICT