With the ratification of the Lisbon Treaty in 2009, the European Parliament was granted significant law-making powers, making it the EU’s co-legislator along with the Council of Ministers for almost all areas of EU competence. Whereas the European Commission remains the EU’s agenda setter and the Council has to give its consent on all pieces of binding legislation, the European Parliament now has the ability to amend, accept, reject, or at least advise on legislative initiatives ranging from energy policy and information technology to international trade agreements and the EU’s budget. The significance of the European Parliament has undoubtedly been increased in legislative terms, but whether the drafters of the Lisbon treaty have successfully reduced the ‘democratic deficit’ of the EU it is still unclear. Now with European elections approaching, a high voter turnout rate would be a good indicator to assess this.
European citizens now have the opportunity to directly elect the Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) who will decide on a great amount of the EU legislation impacting them. But despite this significant empowerment, participation rates in the European elections are still expected to remain at dramatically low levels of less than 50 percent, especially after taking into consideration the disappointing 20.74 percent voter turnout in Croatia’s first European Parliament election last April. Indeed, outside Brussels, the elections are hardly covered by the press, while national, regional, and even local elections taking place at the same time are already triggering public interest. Even when mention is made of the European Parliament elections, it is usually framed around national agendas rather than the issues of pan-European interest that MEPs will work on.
In an attempt to bring the European debate to life, many groups continue to propose a new approach to the elections, whereby citizens would elect their MEPs from both national and pan-European voting lists. This is seen in some quarters as a creative way to promote a European identity among citizens. Whether this proposal, however, could have a significant impact on the democratic deficit is uncertain. Some fear that its implementation would further frustrate the electorate who already perceive the EU as a complex and distant political system. Others argue that with MEPs being often unknown in their own countries, trying to raise awareness of and support for foreign nationals is an unnecessary or undesirable extra burden.
The question remains a hypothetical one at least for 2014, as the proposals have not yet been adopted within Parliament or by the Member States in the Council. The strongest advocate of pan-European elections remains the Union of European Federalists, who this week adopted their Manifesto for 2014, which again outlines their support for this tool in the future, as well as calling for broad Treaty reform in 2015. British Liberal MEP Andrew Duff has been proposing to elect 25 MEPs from one pan-European constituency since 2008, but last year the European Parliament failed to adopt the proposals due to opposition from the current largest political groups, the centre-right European People’s Party and the centre-left Socialists and Democrats.
Many have debated in past weeks about how hard the federalist message should be pushed to European voters, especially in response to the growing popularity of Eurosceptic groups on the back of often contradictory messages about repatriating powers. Even within the ALDE family, the current liberal-centrist political group of the European Parliament, prominent members are criticising their colleagues for not being in tune with voters.
In 1751, Voltaire described Europe as a “kind of a great republic divided into several states…but all corresponding with one another. They all have the same religious foundations, even if divided into several confessions. They all have the same principle of public law and politics…” This notion of Europe remains broadly intact nowadays; a continent that can be seen as both divided and united at the same time. Personally speaking, I believe that openly supporting European principles and values and making them more visible, especially in times of an unprecedented economic and social crisis, could improve democratic legitimacy. The introduction of a pan-European list of candidates in future European Parliament elections could be one of the measures that would improve the EU’s political system and add a true European dimension to the elections.
In a series of articles, Diplomatic Courier and APCO Worldwide are partnering to cover the 2014 European Union elections. Find more information about this series here. Follow @EPElections for daily news and updates from APCO’s team in Brussels.
Theofanis Kakarnias is a member of APCO Worldwide’s government relations team based in Brussels.
Photo: European Parliament (cc).
a global affairs media network
The EU’s Democratic Deficit and the Case for Pan-European Candidate Lists
November 22, 2013
With the ratification of the Lisbon Treaty in 2009, the European Parliament was granted significant law-making powers, making it the EU’s co-legislator along with the Council of Ministers for almost all areas of EU competence. Whereas the European Commission remains the EU’s agenda setter and the Council has to give its consent on all pieces of binding legislation, the European Parliament now has the ability to amend, accept, reject, or at least advise on legislative initiatives ranging from energy policy and information technology to international trade agreements and the EU’s budget. The significance of the European Parliament has undoubtedly been increased in legislative terms, but whether the drafters of the Lisbon treaty have successfully reduced the ‘democratic deficit’ of the EU it is still unclear. Now with European elections approaching, a high voter turnout rate would be a good indicator to assess this.
European citizens now have the opportunity to directly elect the Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) who will decide on a great amount of the EU legislation impacting them. But despite this significant empowerment, participation rates in the European elections are still expected to remain at dramatically low levels of less than 50 percent, especially after taking into consideration the disappointing 20.74 percent voter turnout in Croatia’s first European Parliament election last April. Indeed, outside Brussels, the elections are hardly covered by the press, while national, regional, and even local elections taking place at the same time are already triggering public interest. Even when mention is made of the European Parliament elections, it is usually framed around national agendas rather than the issues of pan-European interest that MEPs will work on.
In an attempt to bring the European debate to life, many groups continue to propose a new approach to the elections, whereby citizens would elect their MEPs from both national and pan-European voting lists. This is seen in some quarters as a creative way to promote a European identity among citizens. Whether this proposal, however, could have a significant impact on the democratic deficit is uncertain. Some fear that its implementation would further frustrate the electorate who already perceive the EU as a complex and distant political system. Others argue that with MEPs being often unknown in their own countries, trying to raise awareness of and support for foreign nationals is an unnecessary or undesirable extra burden.
The question remains a hypothetical one at least for 2014, as the proposals have not yet been adopted within Parliament or by the Member States in the Council. The strongest advocate of pan-European elections remains the Union of European Federalists, who this week adopted their Manifesto for 2014, which again outlines their support for this tool in the future, as well as calling for broad Treaty reform in 2015. British Liberal MEP Andrew Duff has been proposing to elect 25 MEPs from one pan-European constituency since 2008, but last year the European Parliament failed to adopt the proposals due to opposition from the current largest political groups, the centre-right European People’s Party and the centre-left Socialists and Democrats.
Many have debated in past weeks about how hard the federalist message should be pushed to European voters, especially in response to the growing popularity of Eurosceptic groups on the back of often contradictory messages about repatriating powers. Even within the ALDE family, the current liberal-centrist political group of the European Parliament, prominent members are criticising their colleagues for not being in tune with voters.
In 1751, Voltaire described Europe as a “kind of a great republic divided into several states…but all corresponding with one another. They all have the same religious foundations, even if divided into several confessions. They all have the same principle of public law and politics…” This notion of Europe remains broadly intact nowadays; a continent that can be seen as both divided and united at the same time. Personally speaking, I believe that openly supporting European principles and values and making them more visible, especially in times of an unprecedented economic and social crisis, could improve democratic legitimacy. The introduction of a pan-European list of candidates in future European Parliament elections could be one of the measures that would improve the EU’s political system and add a true European dimension to the elections.
In a series of articles, Diplomatic Courier and APCO Worldwide are partnering to cover the 2014 European Union elections. Find more information about this series here. Follow @EPElections for daily news and updates from APCO’s team in Brussels.
Theofanis Kakarnias is a member of APCO Worldwide’s government relations team based in Brussels.
Photo: European Parliament (cc).
