The 8th European Parliamentary Election(s) 9/19/2014 PRESENTATION - - PDF document

The 8th European Parliamentary Election(s) 9/19/2014 1

THE 8TH EUROPEAN PARLIAMENTARY ELECTION(S) (MAY 22-25, 2014) “THIS TIME IT WILL BE DIFFERENT – WON’T IT?” 『今回の選挙は異なるのか？』

Professor Day, Faculty of Economics, Oita University Presented at EUIJ-Kyushu Symposium ‘EP Elections 2014 – EU Citizens and A Future of the EU’ Kyushu University, July 25, 2014. This paper forms part of a JSPS (Kiban C - 26380174) funded project entitled ‘Consolidating or Dismantling Representative Democracy at the EU-level’

PRESENTATION OUTLINE/概要

• 1. Introductory remarks – setting out the political context under which the election(s) would be

fought/序論 ― 選挙戦の政治的背景の設定

• 2. Preparing for the election(s). Addressing the old foe: “turnout”/選挙の準備過程：積年の課題

「投票率」への取り組み

• 3. Key EU-level actors: the European Political Parties (Europarties) and the European Parliamentary

Groups/ EUレベルの主要行為主体：欧州政党（Europarties）と欧州議会内会派（EPGs）

• 4. A European election or 28 national elections?欧州の選挙か、28ヶ国の選挙か？
• 5. The Spitzenkandidaten (leading candidate) process: Enhancing the European dimension of the

election? Spitzenkandidaten（最上位候補）過程：選挙における欧州的側面の強化？

• 6. Analysing the results: does it really amount to a political earthquake? 結果分析：本当に政治

的大変動を意味するのか？

• 7. Concluding thoughts and consequences – was it ‘really’ different this time?結論：考察と帰結

― 今回の選挙は「真の意味で」異なっているのか？

• 1. INTRODUCTORY REMARKS/序論

Setting out the political context under which the election would be fought 選挙戦の政治的背景の設定 “A parliament without tax raising powers” or the right to propose legislation 課税権限と、立法発議権をもた ない欧州議会 The increasing use of ‘gesture politics’/ 増加する「ジェ スチャー政治（gesture politics）」の使用 “It’s the economy stupid” But what type of economy?『It’s the economy, stupid.（経済こそが重要なのだ、

愚か者。）』しかし、いかなる型の

経済なのか

“Differentiation”/ “差異化”

“Brexit” （英国の EU離脱） Is ‘all politics local’? Is democracy at a transnational level possible? 『政治は所詮「地元」中心』 であるのか？国境を越えたレベルでの民主主義は可能なのか？

The EU ‘has lost its way…lost its self confidence… it needs a vision for the future’ Guy Verhofstadt EUは「進路を見失い・・・自信を失って しまった・・・それは将来のビジョンを 必要としている」Guy Verhofstadt

Spitzenkandidat/（最上位候補）

Intra-party and inter-party dynamics. How should the mainstream react to the results at the domestic and EU-level? 党内・党間の力学。主流派は、結果に対して、国内及び EUレベルでいかに対応すべきか？ Inter-institutional relations – ‘powergrabs’ “The Merkel formula” - 7% of the world’s population; 25% of global output; 50% of global spending on social services.『メルケルの公式』 世界人口の7%・ 世界生 産の25%・社会福祉事業への世界支出の50%

Partisanization & politicization to address the

democratic deficit? 民主主義の赤字に対処するための党派化 （Partisanization）と 政治化（Politicization）？

Specific and more general Issues to think about

POLITICAL CONTEXT: THE RISE OF POPULISM 政治的背景：ポピュリズムの台頭

Populist and extremist political forces are now an integral part of the party-system across many EU member states so it should not come as a surprise that elections to the European Parliament would reflect this trend. The unanswered question is what would be the subsequent knock-on impact on domestic and EU politics? How should the political mainstream react? Should it attempt to isolate such forces or engage with them in some shape or form? Populism on the Right/far-right - Key emphasis on party leaders Usually seeking to appeal to voters via some combination of an anti- globalization/anti-immigration/anti-EU ticket. Various flavours of Euroscepticism – For some the EU is a neo-liberal bankers project; for others it stifles entrepreneurialism and the market. Some want to smash the EU and others simply withdrawal. Some are pro-US and others want to challenge US hegemony.

This time there was much speculation about the formation of a far-right European Parliamentary Group. To date this has failed to emerge. In 2007-8 far rights were able to form a group - Identity, Tradition and Sovereign Group. It proved to be short-lived due to internal strife. Populism on the Left/far-left The EU is an elite, neo-liberal project. In the name of market fundamentalism capital (bankers) prevails

• ver the people (labour). Social-democracy, by

embracing this shift, no longer acts in the interests of labour. The left advocates ‘another Europe’. For Alexis Tsipras leader of the Greek party Syriza and European Left Commission President nominee: ‘we need to build a common front against the political forces of “Merkelism” See ‘Alexis Tsipras: As Greek, I’m proud to lead Europe’s Left’, EurActiv, 26 November 2013 Fringe Parties; Anti-establishment parties; populist parties… Giles Merritt, secretary general of the Friends of Europe (think tank): ‘The populists will force the European establishment to explain itself and argue its case’ for greater European solidarity.’ Quoted in Christopher Alessi ‘Populists Fail to Shift EU Balance’, Spiegel, 11/18/2013

• 2. PREPARING FOR THE ELECTION

選挙の準備過程

Addressing the old foe: turnout 積年の課題「投票率」への取 り組み

The 8th European Parliamentary Election(s) 9/19/2014 2

In 2013, the Commission asked Member States and national and Euro political parties to undertake a number of preparatory steps for the 2014 European elections so as to ‘spark a truly European debate – with European Political Parties campaigning on a clear programme of their vision for the future of Europe.’ It was also hoped that more informed voters would help bring a halt to the continuing decline in turnout



‘before and during elections, national political parties should make clear to which European political party they are affiliated’ [this produced a usual mixed bag of results];



‘EU countries should agree on a common day for the European elections’ [could not be agreed upon];



‘political parties should make known which candidate for President of the European Commission they support’ [undertaken with varying levels of enthusiasm and outright hostility/opposition];



‘national parties should inform voters during the campaign about their candidate for President of the Commission’ [those candidates should ‘present[..] their programme in all Member States of the EU’].

Source: ‘2014 European Parliament Elections: Commission recommends that political parties nominate candidates for Commission President’, 12 March 2013. http://ec.europa.eu/commission_2010-2014/reding/multimedia/news/2013/03/20130312_en.htm

SEEKING TO ENHANCE THE ‘EUROPEAN’ QUALITIES OF THE ELECTION/選挙の「欧州的」性質強化の追求

• 4. A EUROPEAN ELECTION OR 28 NATIONAL ELECTIONS?

欧州の選挙か、28ヶ国の選挙か？

Common manifestoes and a common campaign? 共通マニフェストと共通の選 挙運動？

3rd Generation - Movement for a Europe of Liberties & Democracy. EPG: Europe of Freedom and Direct Democracy

‘THREE GENERATIONS’ OF EUROPARTIES/欧州政党の「三つの世代」 Differing levels of institutionalization

3rd Generation - Alliance of European National Movements. No corresponding EPG 3rd Generation. EPG: European Conservatives and Reformists 3rd Generation. European Christian Political

• Movement. No corresponding EPG
• 1stGeneration. EPG: EPP Group

in the European Parliament 2nd Generation. EU Democrats. No corresponding EPG 2nd Generation. EPG European United Left/Nordic Green Left 3rd Generation. An alliance

• f individuals rather than
• parties. No corresponding

EPG

• 1stGeneration. EPG: Alliance of

Liberals and Democrats for Europe- Group

• 1stGeneration. EPG: The

Greens/European Free Alliance

• 1stGeneration. EPG The

Greens/European Free Alliance

• 1stGeneration. EPG: Group of

the Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats 2nd Generation. EPG: Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe- Group

In 2014 there are presently 13 Europarties (at varying stages of development) that span the political spectrum and 7 European Parliamentary Groups (EPGs) plus non-attached members. Differentiation

The Constitutionalization of the Europarties/欧州政党の立憲化

Treaty Provision Additional Comments Lisbon Treaty Title II Provisions on Democratic Principles Article 10 (4), of the Lisbon Treaty, reads: ‘Political Parties at European Level contribute to forming European political awareness and to expressing the will of the citizens of the Union.’ Mirroring the cautionary declaration added to Article 191 at Nice the debate on the amending the regulation stressed that ‘MEPs clarify that the election of the members of the European Parliament by direct universal suffrage, the funding of and limitation of election expenses for all parties and candidates at European Parliament elections is governed in each Member State by national provision.’ It may appear ironic that the Europarties are established as non-profit

• rganizations under national law (in most cases Belgium law) i.e. they lack a

European legal personality The Party Regulation 2004/3 included a set of criteria which was necessary to uphold in order to apply for funding (see Article 3 in the next slide). In 2007 an Amending Regulation was introduced. Some of the highlights from the Amending Regulation included: a commitment to support European political foundations which have to be formally connected with a Euro-party; adjust the minimum co-funding from the general budget of the European Union for a Euro-party from 75 to 85 per cent; provide funding for the Euro-parties to engage in European campaigning. Nice Treaty ‘The Council, acting in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 251, shall lay down the regulations governing political parties at European level and in particular the rules governing their funding.’ Ten years after Maastricht an additional paragraph was finally tagged to Article 138a (now renumbered Article 191) of the EC Treaty: Declaration 11 - clearly aimed at pacifying Member States regarding what some saw as a potential encroachment of sovereignty, was added to the Treaty: ‘Article 191 do not imply any transfer of powers to the European Community and do not affect the application of the relevant national constitutional rules’ Maastricht Treaty (1993) Article 138a proclaimed: ‘Political parties at European level are important as a factor for integration within the Union. They contribute to forming a European awareness and to expressing the political will of the citizens of the Union’ The inclusion of the ‘party article’ was driven by the leaders of the three mainstream party families: Christian Democrats, Liberal and Social Democratic/Socialists.

EUROPEAN MANIFESTOES – STILL LOWEST COMMON DENOMINATORS? 欧州レベルのマニフェスト ― 未だに最小の共通項であるのか？

“For the last 20 years – and this year is no exception – European party manifestoes have been lowest-common- denominator political constructions. They’re a hell of a lot better now than they used to be. Some of us look back to the days when we used to count the footnotes! Nowadays, there aren’t any, which is progress, but they’re still lowest- common-denominator efforts.” David Earnshaw (quoted in

‘European party manifestoes at a glance’, EurActiv.com, 6 May, 2009) Commenting on the lessons learned from 2009 one Europarty official conceded that a ‘one size fits all’ approach had not proved as feasible as had been hoped and as a consequence 2014 was likely to see ‘a minimalist common campaign and shared manifesto’ with member parties free to draw on what they wanted while ‘utilizing the party logo and campaign slogan’ (Interview with the author, 2013) ‘A European manifesto is symbolic [in that it provides] a common glue for the Europarty but for the campaign it is of limited use until we have a [pan-European] transnational list’ (2014) ‘We didn’t ask for a translation of the […] manifesto as we knew we would not use it…Others did and had a much stronger [Europarty] dimension in their campaigns.’ (2014) Interviews with the various Europarty officials

Limited signs of the EU-level party identification/ EU EUレベルの政党アイデンティ ティの限られた兆候

In the Netherlands after the National party name the party’s corresponding Europarty is also listed (but no logos) Only NINE Member States allow for Europarty names and or logos to appear on ballot papers PES Campaign ‘Knock the Vote’. This was a new approach for many member parties as face- to-face canvassing was not part of their national political culture “In advance to my departure and even during the week before the elections there was NOTHING in the mailbox.” Correspondence with academic based in

Germany Photos courtesy of Yoko Nishimura

Source: German electoral commission

The 8th European Parliamentary Election(s) 9/19/2014 3

• 5. THE SPITZENKANDIDATEN PROCESS: ENHANCING THE

EUROPEAN DIMENSION OF THE ELECTION? SPITZENKANDIDATEN（最上位候補）過程：選挙 における欧州的側面の強化？

An attempt to enhance partisanization and politicization 党派化 及び 政治化を昂進す る試み

A NEW LEGAL CONTEXT - LISBON TREATY (TEU) ART. 14 & 17 新たな法的背景 ― リスボン条約（EU条約：TEU）第14・17条

Lisbon Maastricht/Nice Article 14 (1) The European Parliament shall, jointly with the Council, exercise legislative and budgetary functions. It shall exercise functions of political control and consultation as laid down in the Treaties. It shall elect the President of the Commission. [Parliament’s new powers now cover an array of new policy areas including the ability to veto trade deals and have oversight over the EEAS] Article 158 (2). 'The governments of the Member States shall nominate by common accord, after consulting the European Parliament, the person they intend to appoint as President of the Commission.‘ Nice Art. 217(2) ‘The Council, meeting in the composition of Heads of State or Government and acting by a qualified majority, shall nominate the person it intends to appoint as President of the Commission; the nomination shall be approved by the European Parliament’. Article 14 (2) The European Parliament shall be composed

• f representatives of the Union's citizens.

Article 137. ‘The European Parliament, which shall consist of representatives of the peoples of the States brought together in the Community...’ Article 17 (7) Taking into account the elections to the European Parliament and after having held the appropriate consultations, the European Council, acting by a qualified majority, shall propose to the European Parliament a candidate for President of the Commission. This candidate shall be elected by the European Parliament by a majority

• f its component members…

NOTE: The Europarties have been instrumental in pushing the idea that the ‘face’/leading candidate (Spitzenkandidat) of the Europarty whose European Parliamentary Group holds the largest number of seats should be selected as the President of the Commission. Europarty

欧州政党

Type of contest/ 選抜の型 Comments: lukewarm support and outright hostility コメント：手ぬるい支持とあからさまな反感 EPP

Contest between Michel Barnier and Jean-Claude Juncker. Juncker selected in Dublin March 2014 From the 800 possible votes 629 ballots were cast. Juncker received 382 votes and Barnier 245 (2 were spoilt). Prior to the Congress Angela Merkel and Herman van Rompuy both expressed scepticism about the Spitzenkandidat process. Joseph Dahl, President of the EPP, Dublin (March 7) though said: ‘If we win the election, and we will win, let me be clear it is our candidate who will be President of the Commission and nobody else.’

PES

No contest. Started out advocating a primary process in 2010. Martin Schultz selected as the only candidate There was pushback from the UK and Scandinavian member parties. In the end there was only one candidate. At the Rome Congress (March 2014) UK Labour was the only PES member party to vote against Schulz

ALDE (EDP)

No contest. ‘Two’ candidates fronted the campaig. 14 national parties, led by the UK Liberal Democrats, who were unhappy with likely choice of Guy Verhofstadt, signed a letter of support for Olli Rehn. In the end a deal was done to maintain party unity (without an election) making Guy Verhofstadt the ALDE candidate for Commission Presidentand Rehn as co-leader.

European Greens

• Contest. 4 candidates – 2 selected.

French MEP José Bové and German MEP Ska Keller. Under the banner ‘The Future of Europe is up to you’ the EGP was the only party to hold an open (on-line) EU- wide primary election. 22,676 voted. They had hoped for more.

European Left

No contest. Alexis Tsipras (leader of the Greek opposition Syriza) A symbolic choice given the left’s view of austerity (read ‘Merkelism) and its impact on Greek society

ECR

Chose not to field a candidate Martin Callanan (Group President) ‘We're living in a Brussels bubble here… We're interested in this subject, we know about it. But really, in the world out there I find it hard to believe that more than a micro percentage of the population in any country are actually going to be basing their vote in the elections on any serious consideration

• f who the trans-European candidates might be.’ Quoted in European Voice, 20.2.14.

EFD

Chose not to field a candidate

‘STRETCHING’ THE INTERPRETATION OF ARTICLE 17 (7)? 第17条7項の「拡大」解釈？

PUBLIC OPINION POLL – ‘I am happy that members

• f the European Parliament are choosing the next

President of the European Commission, as this will make the winning candidate more legitimate’. ‘Agree 39% Disagree 27% Don’t Know 34% Source: Headline Findings AECR European Union Study, 20th February 2014

José Bové MEP & Ska Keller MEP – European Green Party ‘It is us who must take this initiative’ said Hannes Swoboda (leader of the S&D Group) ‘Our interpretation of the Lisbon Treaty is that the European Parliament has the task to propose a candidate to the Council and after the discussion by the Council this proposal would come back to the Parliament because it is the Parliament who must decide and, in the end, vote’, he said. Quoted in ‘MEPs vie with Van Rompuy for power of initiative on Commission Presidency’, European Voice, June 6, 2014.

Jean-Claude Juncker (EPP) Guy Verhofstadt - ALDE

Alexis Tsipras – Party of European Left

Commenting on the candidates and potential candidates as at the beginning of February 2014 the European Voice claimed that: ‘All this smacks of an EU still dominated by the founding six states, by men, and by old ideas’ Quoted in ‘A stalking horse doing

the EU few favours’, 06/02/14. Numerous televised candidates debates and more media attention than ever before!

Martin Schulz (PES)

Photos from Europarty websites

• 7. CONCLUDING THOUGHTS AND CONSEQUENCES:

WAS IT ‘REALLY’ DIFFERENT THIS TIME? 結論：考察と帰結 ― 今回の選挙は 「真の意味で」異なっているのか？

“Yes”, “No”, “Maybe”: where next?

Initial Results (25 May) and the final allocation of seats for the European Parliamentary Groups (June 24)/初期 結果（5月25日）及び欧州議会内会派の最終議席配分（6月24日）

Initial results (May 25th) Initially it appeared as though turnout was up at 43.09%. This was amended to 42.54% (less than 2009) a couple of months later. 275 56 195 85

35 58 33

27

Number of seats at time of dissolution

Final distribution of seats June 24th

EFDD – Europe of Freedom and Direct Democracy

The 8th European Parliamentary Election(s) 9/19/2014 4

Jan Techau, Director of Carnegie Foundation Europe, called the Spitzenkandidat process, ‘an attempted power grab by the Parliament’ and ‘a scandal’ ‘an ill-conceived idea’; [that was] ‘undermining democracy’. For the European Voice (a weekely newspaper): ‘Those who argue that the dictates of the spitzenkandidaten contest must be followed are living in a make-believe world.’ Quoted in ‘Cameron is

both right and wrong’, European Voice, June 5, 2014.

‘I am a member of the EPP, we nominated Juncker as our top

• candidate. The agenda can be

implemented by him or many others. I don’t doubt it.’ Merkel quoted in ‘EU leaders

decline to endorse Juncker’, EUObserver, May 27 2014

Daniel Cohn-Bendit of the European Greens was once quoted as saying ‘Juncker, he is the most socialist Christian Democrat there is’. Quoted

in ‘Juncker: The veteran EU insider loathed by Britain’, Euractiv, 27 June 2014.

In the wake of the European elections where the EPP emerged with the largest number of seats the UK Prime Minister & UK tabloid newspapers launched a campaign against Jean Claude Juncker becoming Commission

• President. One headline in The Sun

newspaper (the most popular daily tabloid) read: ‘6 reasons why this is the most dangerous man in Europe’.

“Yes” – The ‘indirect’ election of the Commission President/ “Yes” ― 欧州委員会委員長の「間接的」選挙

Juncker’s victory now means five years of enhanced media

• pportunities for the European

People’s Party (EPP).

European Parliament 422 votes for -250 against and 47 abstentions The first time the European Council takes a formal vote: 26 votes in favour of selecting Jean Claude Juncker as the Commission President designate; 2 against (the UK and Hungary)

“Maybe” - Increasing the likelihood of a BREXIT? “Maybe” ― BREXIT（英国の離脱）の可能性増大？

Natural allies dismayed with overall UK Government attitude to EU Polish Foreign Minister Sikorski: “You know, his whole strategy

• f feeding them scraps in order to satisfy them is, just as I

predicted, turning against him. “He should have said f*** off, tried to convince people and isolate [the sceptics]. But he ceded the field to those that are now embarrassing him.”

Source: 'Polish ministerial ally of Cameron embarrasses PM on EU‘, Financial Times, FT.com, 23 June 2014.

In an editorial entitled ‘Splendid isolation’ – The Times (UK newspaper) argued that ‘…the prime minister has strengthened Britain’s position with his robust opposition.’ “Sometimes you have to lose a battle to win the war”. David Cameron An editorial in Der Spiegel did not mince its words: ‘For years Britain has blackmailed and made a fool out of the

• EU. The UK must finally make a choice. It can play by the rules or it can leave the European Union.’ ‘Decision Time:

Britain Must Choose Now If It Will Stay in Europe’, June 3, 2014.

European Council Conclusions 26-7 June. In a section entitled ‘The Next Institutional Cycle’ Point 27 read: ‘The UK raised some concerns related to the future development of the EU. These concerns will need to be addressed. In this context, the European Council noted that the concept of ever closer union allows for different paths of integration for different countries, allowing those that want to deepen integration to move ahead, while respecting the wish of those who do not want to deepen any further.