Research project | Updated 18/03/2011 

Access to the publications on "European Parties and Parliaments" project below

About the project

The “democratic deficit” argument often used to criticise the European Union is in large part unfounded. With the expansion of the so-called “co-decision” procedure, the European institutions function in a democratic way based on the work of two legislative “chambers”: the European parliament (taking its legitimacy from citizens), and the Council of Ministers (from states).

Nonetheless it cannot be denied that there remain numerous flaws in the practice of democracy at EU level. The European Parliament does not have the degree of legitimacy that it might have, due to low participation in its elections and a lack of knowledge among the public about what it does. The EU suffers in general from a poorly developed interface between democracy practised at national and European levels. A major cause of the problem is the schizophrenia of political leaders who use the EU as a scapegoat. Political parties are another important missing link: European parties still have difficulty asserting themselves, while national parties refuse to participate fully in European affairs. Meanwhile national parliaments have had trouble finding their place in the European decision-making system, which has tended to bolster the domination of national executives.

Participatory democracy can play a useful complementary role in strengthening EU democracy in general and in creating a feeling of belonging among citizens. But the organs of representative democracy  European Parliament, political parties, national parliaments  remain the essential levers. Notre Europe therefore aims to focus its thinking and action on these vectors, by concentrating on the functioning of Europe's parties and parliaments, and on the crowning event of the European elections.

European Parties and Parliaments

Publications

From institutional Reform to Mass Politics or How to Engage Citizens in the Union of Lisbon, Policy Brief by Gaëtane Ricard-Nihoul and Goran Von Sydow (November 2010).

European political parties: the missing link, Policy paper by Julian Priestley (November 2010).

Post-national democracy and the reform of the European Parliament, Policy paper by Andrew Duff (November 2010).

What is the impact of the EU interventions at the national level?,Study by Yves Bertoncini (August 2009).

National Laws of Community origin: Dispelling the 80% Myth, Policy Brief by Yves Bertoncini (June 2009).

Democracy in the EU and the Role of the European Parliament, Study co-written with Federal Trust, Institut für Europäische Politik, Centro Studi sul Federalismo, Istituto Affari Internazionali and Notre Europe (March 2009).

European Elections

Essential to European democracy, this 5-yearly date in the electoral calendar has held for thirty years. Since 1979 these elections have conferred substantial political legitimacy on the European parliament, since it is the only EU institution directly elected by citizens. This democratic legitimacy has in turn served gradually to increase the power of the parliament. As the "European Parliamentary Assembly", the body was originally limited to a consultative role and comprised national MPs designated by their peers. Treaties have turned it into a veritable European Parliament, with budgetary, legislative and political competencies. The co-decision procedure, introduced by the Treaty of Maastricht, grants the Parliament equality alongside the Council of Ministers during decision-making.

But while the European Parliament's role has expanded significantly, turnout at European elections has suffered a fate of inverse proportions. In 1979, 63% of European voters cast their ballot; in 2004 this figure was only 45.5%. The elections of June 2009, with a turnout of 43.2%, did not reverse this trajectory. In addition, media coverage of the European Parliament is weak and its work ill-understood – even though it is seen as an important institution, and one trusted by citizens. Often these are the very reasons given for not voting: a lack of information, poor knowledge of the Parliament, a feeling that voting will change nothing.

And yet the European elections are important.may not escape this rule. They take place in a difficult context. The socio-economic consequences of the world financial crisis, together with the parallel resurgence of the "each for himself" reflex, are linking with uncertainty over the future of the Treaty of Lisbon - which among other things was supposed to increase the competencies of the Parliament. The Parliament was the major winner in the most recent treaty revisions, gaining a gradual extension of legislative co-decision with the Council. The Parliament also has significant influence on the budget, and this has been strengthened by the Lisbon Treaty. As it happens, the EU will begin a re-examination of its budget – a budget that member states have tended to reduce to a set of bargaining chips, forsaking any overarching vision. In addition, the treaty establishes a link between the result of the European elections and the choice of Commission president. A vote at European level therefore expresses a far more subtle choice than the simple yes-no of a referendum. It is a genuine opportunity – and a rare one, arising only every 5 years – to express a vision of a future EU which accords with one's political convictions, and to send a strong message both to future MEPs and to the new Commission.

The next European elections will take place in 2014. Why be concerned today about their turnout? Because if we want to reverse a 30-year fall in turnout – which has happened as the parliament has grown more and more powerful – then we need to act now. But above all the issue of the bond between citizens and Europe's institutions needs to be addressed more than once every five years. The European debate needs to come alive at both EU and member-state level, and it needs clarification and politicisation. Only then will European democracy be an everyday reality., it is was tacitly agreed that the appointment must be made within the political grouping which won in June. After all, the European Parliament has approved the president proposed by the Council. A vote at European level therefore expresses a far more subtle choice than the simple yes-no of a referendum. It was a genuine opportunity - and a rare one, arising only every 5 years - to express a vision of a future EU which accords with one's political convictions, and to send a strong message both to future MEPs and to the new Commission.

Publications:

European Parliament: some lessons to draw from the last elections, Note by Tommaso Padoa-Schioppa, Daniel Boy, Gérard Grunberg and Olivier Costa (July 2009).

European elections: Five reflections for discussion, Note by Gaëtane Ricard-Nihoul (June 2009).

Les jeux ne sont pas faits, Note by Alain Dauvergne, only in French (June 2009).

Elections européennes 2009 : acteurs, enjeux et alternatives, Policy brief by Gaëtane Ricard-Nihoul, only in French (May 2009).

Does the Union's Action Meet the Citizen's Preferences ?, Policy Brief by Renaud Dehousse, only in French (May 2009).

Un comparatif des manifestes des partis politiques européens, Note, only in French (May 2009).

Des "partis politiques au niveau européen" ? Etat des lieux à la veille des élections européennes de juin 2009, Etude by Francisco Roa Bastos, only in French (mai 2009).