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

PRESENTATION OUTLINE/概要
1. Introductory remarks – setting out the political context under which the election(s) would befought/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 ParliamentaryGroups/ 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？

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’

5. The Spitzenkandidaten (leading candidate) process: Enhancing the European dimension of theelection? 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？

Specific and more general Issues to think about
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“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“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%
Intra-party and inter-party dynamics. How should themainstream 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？

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

The increasing use of ‘gesture politics’/ 増加する「ジェスチャー政治（gesture politics）」の使用“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

Partisanization & politicization to address thedemocratic 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）？

Spitzenkandidat/（最上位候補）
Inter-institutional relations – ‘powergrabs’“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？

Fringe Parties; Anti-establishment parties; populist parties…

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 unansweredquestion is what would be the subsequent knock-on impact on domestic and EU politics? How should the politicalmainstream react? Should it attempt to isolate such forces or engage with them in some shape or form?
Populism on the Left/far-left
The EU is an elite, neo-liberal project. In the name ofmarket fundamentalism capital (bankers) prevails
over the people (labour). Social-democracy, byembracing this shift, no longer acts in the interests oflabour.
The left advocates ‘another Europe’. For Alexis
Tsipras leader of the Greek party Syriza andEuropean Left Commission President nominee: ‘weneed to build a common front against the politicalforces of “Merkelism” See ‘Alexis Tsipras: As Greek, I’m
proud to lead Europe’s Left’, EurActiv, 26 November 2013

Populism on the Right/far-right - Key emphasis on party leaders
Usually seeking to appeal to voters via some combination of an antiglobalization/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 tosmash 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.

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

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

1

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

SEEKING TO ENHANCE THE ‘EUROPEAN’ QUALITIES OF THE
ELECTION/選挙の「欧州的」性質強化の追求
In 2013, the Commission asked Member States and national and Euro political parties to undertake a number ofpreparatory 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 hopedthat 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

Differing levels of institutionalization
3rd Generation. An allianceof individuals rather thanparties. No corresponding
EPG

Differentiation

2nd Generation. EPG
European United
Left/Nordic Green Left

3rd Generation - Alliance of European
National Movements. No corresponding
EPG

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

1st Generation. EPG: Alliance of
Liberals and Democrats for
Europe- Group

1st Generation. EPG The
Greens/European Free Alliance

the Progressive Alliance ofSocialists and Democrats

1st Generation. EPG: EPP Groupin the European Parliament

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

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 themembers of the European Parliament by direct universal suffrage, the funding ofand 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
organizations 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 theEuropean Union for a Euro-party from 75 to 85 per cent; provide funding for the Euro-parties to engage in European campaigning.

3rd Generation. EPG: European
Conservatives and Reformists

3rd Generation. European Christian Political
Movement. No corresponding EPG

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.

EUROPEAN MANIFESTOES – STILL LOWEST COMMON DENOMINATORS?
欧州レベルのマニフェスト‘A European manifesto is symbolic [in that it― 未だに 最小の共通項であるのか？
provides] a common glue for the Europarty“For the last 20 years – and this year is no exception –European party manifestoes have been lowest-commondenominator 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 lowestcommon-denominator efforts.” David Earnshaw (quoted in‘European party manifestoes at a glance’, EurActiv.com, 6 May, 2009)

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

TreatyNice Treaty

1st Generation. EPG: Group of
1st Generation. EPG: The
Greens/European Free Alliance

欧州の選挙か、28ヶ国の選挙か？

The Constitutionalization of the Europarties/欧州政党の立憲化‘THREE GENERATIONS’ OF EUROPARTIES/欧州政党の「三つの世代」

2nd Generation. EU Democrats.
No corresponding EPG

4. A EUROPEAN ELECTION OR 28 NATIONAL ELECTIONS?

but for the campaign it is of limited use until
we have a [pan-European] transnational list’(2014)

Maastricht
Treaty (1993)‘The Council, acting in accordance with theprocedure referred to in Article 251, shall lay
down the regulations governing political parties at
European level and in particular the rules
governing their funding.’

Article 138a proclaimed: ‘Political parties at
European level are important as a factor for
integration within the Union. They contribute toforming a European awareness and to expressing
the political will of the citizens of the Union’

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 somesaw 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 notaffect the application of the relevant national constitutional rules’
The inclusion of the ‘party article’ was driven by the leaders of the threemainstream party families: Christian Democrats, Liberal and Social
Democratic/Socialists.

Limited signs of the EU-level party identification/ EUレベルの政党アイデンティ
Only NINE Member States
ティの限られた兆候
allow for Europarty names
In the Netherlands after the National party
name the party’s corresponding Europarty
is also listed (but no logos)‘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)and or logos to appear on
ballot papers
PES Campaign ‘Knock the
Vote’. This was a new
approach for manymember parties as faceto-face canvassing was
not part of their national
political culture

Interviews with the various Europarty officials

Source: German electoral commission

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)“In advance to my departureand even during the week
before the elections there
was NOTHING in the
mailbox.” Correspondencewith academic based inGermany

Photos courtesy of Yoko Nishimura

2

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

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

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

Europarty

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 andJean-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 theSpitzenkandidat 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 President and Rehn as co-leader.

EuropeanGreensContest. 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) EUwide primary election. 22,676 voted. They had hoped for more.

EuropeanLeft

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, weknow 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 considerationof who the trans-European candidates might be.’ Quoted in European Voice, 20.2.14.

欧州政党

LisbonMaastricht/Nice

Article 14 (1) The European Parliament shall, jointly with theCouncil, 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 theCommission.
[Parliament’s new powers now cover an array of newpolicy areas including the ability to veto trade deals andhave oversight over the EEAS]

Article 158 (2). 'The governments of the Member States shall nominate bycommon 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 ofState or Government and acting by a qualified majority, shall nominate
the person it intends to appoint as President of the Commission; thenomination shall be approved by the European Parliament’.

Article 14 (2) The European Parliament shall be composedof representatives of the Union's citizens.

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

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

Martin Schulz (PES)EFD

Guy Verhofstadt - ALDE

José Bové MEP & Ska Keller MEP –European Green Party

Numerous televised candidates debates
and more media attention than ever before!

Chose not to field a candidate

PUBLIC OPINION POLL – ‘I am happy that membersof 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%

Jean-Claude Juncker (EPP)

Alexis Tsipras –Party of European Left

Photos from Europarty websites

Source: Headline Findings AECR European Union Study, 20th
February 2014

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.

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）
Number of seats at time of dissolution

Final distribution of seats June 24th

Initial results (May 25th) Initially it appeared as though
turnout was up at 43.09%. This was amended to42.54% (less than 2009) a couple of months later.

275

195
56
85
35

58
33

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？

EFDD – Europe of Freedom and Direct Democracy

27“Yes”, “No”, “Maybe”: where
next?

3

The 8th European Parliamentary Election(s)“Yes” – The ‘indirect’ election of the Commission President/“Yes” ― 欧州委員会委員長の「間接的」選挙
In the wake of the European elections
where the EPP emerged with thelargest number of seats the UK Prime
Minister & UK tabloid newspapers
launched a campaign against JeanClaude 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’.

‘I am a member of the EPP, wenominated 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

The first time the European
Council takes a formal vote: 26
votes in favour of selecting
Jean Claude Juncker as theCommission President
designate; 2 against (the UK
and Hungary)

Jan Techau, Director of Carnegie Foundation
Europe, called the Spitzenkandidat process, ‘anattempted 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 areliving in a make-believe world.’ Quoted in ‘Cameron isboth right and wrong’, European Voice, June 5, 2014.

Daniel Cohn-Bendit of the European Greens
was once quoted as saying ‘Juncker, he is themost socialist Christian Democrat there is’. Quotedin ‘Juncker: The veteran EU insider loathed by Britain’, Euractiv, 27 June 2014.

European Parliament 422
votes for -250 against and47 abstentions

Juncker’s victory now means
five years of enhanced media
opportunities for the European
People’s Party (EPP).

9/19/2014“Maybe” - Increasing the likelihood of a BREXIT?
“Maybe” ― BREXIT（英国の離脱）の可能性増大？
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

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

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 ofintegration 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.

4