EURO-PARLIAMENT ELECTIONS IN EUROPE: PAY ATTENTION

By IPS Correspondents and - - Reprint | | Print |

This column is available for visitors to the IPS website only for reading. Reproduction in print or electronic media is prohibited. Media interested in republishing may contact romacol@ips.org.

BRUSSELS, Jun 1 2004 (IPS) - This week-end\’s elections to the European Parliament may seem like yet another of those \’\’old Europe\’\’ oddities –like the welfare state, long paid vacations, and constitutional monarchies– but its importance should not be underestimated, writes Joaquin Roy is university professor \’Jean Monnet\’ and director of the Centre of the European Union of the University of Miami. The European Parliament is the largest directly-elected democratic legislature in the world: with 732 members, it represents 350 million citizens from 25 countries. Yet to judge from press coverage and the projected rate of voter turnout (less than 50 percent) both foreigners and Europeans seem to share a certain scepticism about the role of institution. What the citizens who stay away from the polls apparently do not know is that their daily existence depends more and more on the decisions taken by the Euro-parliament, which passes community laws each week. More than eighty percent of European legislation originates from the EU institutional process.

This week-end’s elections to the European Parliament (EP) may seem like yet another of those ”old Europe” oddities –like the welfare state, long paid vacations, and constitutional monarchies– but its importance should not be underestimated.

The European Parliament is the largest directly-elected democratic legislature in the world: with 732 members, it represents 350 million citizens from 25 countries. Yet to judge from press coverage and the projected rate of voter turnout (less than 50 percent) both foreigners and Europeans seem to share a certain scepticism about the role of institution.

This would also seem to reflect a certain amount of doubt regarding the entire integration process that began in 1950 with the foundation of the original European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC), the predecessor of today’s EU. Curiously, while the EP has notably increased in power since 1979 when direct elections began, voter turnout has dropped (from 63 percent in 1979 to 49.4 percent in 1999).

What the citizens who stay away from the polls apparently do not know is that their daily existence depends more and more on the decisions taken by the Euro-parliament, which passes community laws each week. More than eighty percent of European legislation originates from the EU institutional process.

Why, then, this apparent disinterest?

The first explanation is that the EP does not operate like a typical congress, which proposes and passes bills. Rather, the EP co-decides; its prerogative is to consider bills presented by the other fundamental institutions of the EU triangle: the Commission (theoretically the executive) and the Council (composed of the heads of government of each member state). It is this peculiarity that gives rise to charges that the EU suffers from a ”democratic deficit”.

Then there is the apparent dissipation of energy and funds caused by the fact that the EP is divided among three sites. With a Secretariat located in Luxembourg, its central seat in the French city of Strasbourg (where plenary sessions take place during one week each month), and the bulk of the work taking place in committees meeting in Brussels, the EU Parliament well deserves its image of a nomadic, multilingual (it has 20 official languages) three-ring circus, with a high rate of absenteeism that television cameras try to disguise without great success.

In addition, the origin of many of the Euro-parliamentarians is a cause of ironic commentaries. Some EP members are old glories that were dismissed by the national governments; others receive their seats as a sort of retirement favour; and many are simply unknown to their voters.

Despite its far-from-positive image, the EP has be able to increase its influence, steadily and implacably. Its latest notable victory was its success in pushing for the resignation of the Commission presided over by Jacques Santer in 1999, under allegations of corruption. When the new European Constitution is approved, the Parliament will have even more power, extending to thorny areas such as justice and agriculture.

After the upcoming elections, the EP will begin to exert pressure to name a successor to the current president of the Commission, Italian Romano Prodi. If predictions are correct, the European Popular Party, with its conservative and Christian Democrat allies, will surpass the Socialists and Labour Parties.

With this electoral advantage, the conservatives of the EU Parliament will press for a conservative or, as an alternative, a liberal centrist, to be the new president of the executive (whose appointment is the prerogative of the European Council). This outcome will transform the appointment of the head of Commission into a semi-parliamentary experiment.

More than ten years ago, the US leadership did not pay proper attention to the EU process, which then led to the introduction of the euro. Used to dealing with individual governments and picking and choosing willing leaders, the US power elite will be better prepared to deal with an ever more complex EU if it familiarises itself with its Parliament. (END/COPYRIGHT IPS)