The ‘Personalisation’ of the European Elections: A half-hearted attempt to increase turnout and democratic legitimacy? EPIN [Working] Paper No. 37, 11 April 2014

On May 22nd to the 25th, elections to the European Parliament are taking place throughout the European Union. Following a recent EP initiative, most of the European political parties have selected top candidates for the position of Commission President, who are to lead an EU-wide campaign, with the objective of increasing citizens’ interest in the elections and reinforcing their European dimension. This paper analyses the main weaknesses in the process of selecting the lead candidates and how they are approaching the campaign. In addition to the challenges posed by a cross-national campaign, the lack of a clear political programme and the possibility that none of the candidates will become the President of the next Commission might all limit the impact of this new initiative on voter turnout and undermine EU democratic legitimacy. The mainstream parties might also fail to counter the rise of radical eurosceptic parties, which so far are proving more successful in mobilising the protest vote in the wake of the euro crisis.

Between Apathy and Anger: Challenges to the Union from the 2014 Elections to the European Parliament. EPIN [Working] Paper No. 39, 20 May 2014

This EPIN study brings together contributions from a ​broad selection of member states ​and ​provid​es ​insightful analysis ​into the 2014 elections to the European Parliament on the ground. The report reveals the different factors that impede the development of genuine European elections and the consequences of the ballot in the member states covered by the study​, namely Bulgaria, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, the Netherlands, Poland, Romania, Spain and the UK​,​ and at EU level. The report finds that: • The EP Resolution to encourage European parties to nominate candidates for the next Commission President has not really increased public interest in the EU and voter turnout will probably remain low. • Visibility of the European top candidates in most member states has been quite limited. • National manifestos do not coincide – and sometimes event conflict with – the European parties’ manifestos. • Election debates focus on national issues; EU issues are only brought to public debate when they are relevant for domestic politics. • Again, we will see a protest vote against governments and large parties. The EP elections are still perceived as a test ahead of local and national elections, or as a vote of confidence in national governments. • This year the protest vote also concerns the EU. The report predicts a more eurosceptic ballot that might complicate decision-making in the EU, exacerbate the conflict between the national and European levels and increase tensions among member states.

The European Parliament’s New Role in Trade Policy: Turning power into impact. CEPS Special Report No. 89, 21 May 2014

The power of the European Parliament in EU trade policy has increased significantly with the Lisbon Treaty. Even though it had already acquired a greater informal role, the codification of its involvement enables the EP to have a stronger say in trade policy. Against the background of increased legal competences granted by the Treaty of Lisbon to the European Parliament in EU trade policy, this Policy Brief addresses two important questions. The first concerns the extent to which the EP’s power in trade policy has increased: Has the EP effectively played a bigger role since the end of 2009? The second relates to the substance of the EP’s trade policy preferences: Does the EP attempt to push EU trade relations into a more or less normative and/or protectionist direction? Its main argument is that the Lisbon Treaty not only heralds a major leap forward in legal terms, but that the current EP legislature has also managed to increase its political clout in trade policy-making. Nevertheless, a major challenge for the new EP legislature 2014-2019 will be to turn this into effective influence.

The new European Parliament: Workable but impaired? CEPS Commentary, 27 June 2014

The ongoing selection of the next President of the European Commission has underscored the growing importance of the European Parliament in EU decisionmaking and in promoting democratic legitimacy at EU level. Strikingly, the new Parliament will be more Eurosceptical, radical and fragmented than ever before, which, among other things, will constrain the building of majorities to pass legislation and adopt decisions. The close relationship between the outcome of the EP elections and the governability of the EP should prompt a serious debate on the matter.

Euroscepticism vs. Political Pragmatism: The Finns Party tones down its criticism of the EU. EPIN Commentary No. 19, 26 June 2014

While many Eurosceptic parties in Europe achieved historical successes in this year’s EP elections, Finland’s populist Finns Party was unable to fulfil its own high expectations. With the eurozone crisis at least temporarily subsiding and Finland’s own economy struggling, the party has been unable to find a new electoral trump card. Facing a changed political climate and stiffer competition, the party is currently toning down its criticism of the EU, as indicated by its recent decision to join the British Tories in the European Conservatives and Reformists (ECR) group.

Common Misconceptions about Elections to the European Parliament. CEPS Commentary, 23 May 2014

Much commentary on the EP elections has followed the line that the European Parliament somehow has less democratic legitimacy because the participation rate is low, and that these elections are taken less seriously because people’s trust in the EU institutions in general and the European Parliament in particular is low. However, both arguments lose much of their validity if the numbers are judged in a wider context.

Euro-enthusiasm, Euro-rejection, and various shades of grey: The 2014 European Parliament election campaign in the Netherlands. EPIN Commentary No. 18, 29 April 2014

With less than a month to go to the European Parliament (EP) election in the Netherlands on May 22nd, the campaign has barely kicked off. It remains to be seen whether the campaign will address concrete EU policies in a palatable way and whether all parties are able to present clear visions about the future of the European Union. The traditional mainstream parties (the Christian Democratic CDA, Liberal VVD and Social Democratic PvdA) all agree that EU membership is essentially beneficial to the Netherlands, but are careful to stress the shortcomings of the EU in its present form. The parties outside the traditional three that can be expected to do well adopt a more outspoken position on European integration. These include the pro-European Democrats 66 (D66), the Eurosceptic Socialist Party (SP), and the Euroreject Freedom Party (PVV). Yet, reasons for their success should probably not be sought mainlyin their positions on European integration, but rather more in the unpopularity of the incumbent parties and the „second order‟ character of EP elections.

Political crossroads ahead in Sweden: The signs are red-green. EPIN Commentary No. 20, 31 July 2014

The political balance in Sweden was upset in this year’s elections to the European Parliament (EP). The far-right ‘Sweden Democrats’ almost tripled their vote-share and the Greens gained enough votes to become the second-largest Swedish party in the EP after the Social Democrats. Support for the current government incumbents, the Moderates, fell beyond expectation. The party will not recover in time for the national elections in September, whereas both the Greens and the Sweden Democrats are likely to repeat their EP election success. Since the Sweden Democrats are unlikely to form part of the coalition government – the election-winners will be the Greens and Social Democrats – Sweden’s political landscape is set to undergo a shift to the left.

Advances in EU Gender Equality: Missing the mark? EPIN [Working] Paper No. 41/September 2014

Gender balance has been a particularly salient issue in the recent process of formulating the list of designated commissioners. Jean-Claude Juncker’s success, as President-elect of the European Commission, in securing the designation of nine women as commissioners should be seen in perspective. Female representation in top EU positions remains low. This paper analyses the EP committees, finding a clear divergence in legislative influence between committees chaired by men and women. Although female political representation has been increasing, this is happening at a very slow pace and the most influential leadership roles in the EP remain dominated by men. This raises questions of the possible need to resort to stronger measures to improve female representation in the EU institutions.

Opportunities and challenges in the area of employment, social affairs, skills and labour mobility. EPC Commentary, 30 September 2014

On 1 October 2014, Marianne Thyssen, Commissioner-designate for Employment, Social Affairs, Skills and Labour Mobility, will face a European Parliament (EP) hearing. On this occasion, Thyssen will have to perform a delicate balancing act consisting of on the one hand, taking into consideration the significant budget constraints that a number of Member States are still facing and following the still prevailing political line of fiscal consolidation and sound public finances, and on the other hand, of demonstrating her strong commitment for Social Europe. In the context of the upcoming hearing, this commentary aims to outline the features, opportunities and challenges of the new portfolio related to employment and social affairs in view to providing an input into the political debate.

Stigmatisation of EU mobile citizens: a ticking time bomb for the European project. EPC Commentary, 24 January 2014

The 2013 European Year of Citizens was profoundly marked by escalating attacks against one of the EU’s major achievement for EU citizens: freedom of movement. In April 2013, Home Affairs Ministers from Austria, Germany, the Netherlands and the UK were party to a letter claiming that “a significant number of new immigrants draw social assistance in the host countries, frequently without genuine entitlement, burdening host societies’ social welfare systems”. This letter laid the groundwork for a “battle plan”, presented by David Cameron in November, which aimed to make the free movement of persons “less free” and put forward the idea of capping “EU migration”. Furthermore, in December, the German conservative Christian Social Union (CSU) took up a similar petty political discourse. After the end of the transitional period for Romania and Bulgaria on 1 January 2014, the debate continues with Chuka Umunna (British Labour Party) proposing to restrict the freedom of movement to highly skilled EU citizens and to citizens in possession of a firm job offer. Alongside this, the German Chancellor, Angela Merkel announced the formation of a committee to investigate “poverty migration” in Germany. This wave of resentment has been more recently followed by the UK Prime Minister David Cameron, expressing his intention to re-negotiate EU law in order to be able to withdraw child benefits from EU citizens working in the UK, citing Polish citizens working in the UK as an example. Seeing this as a stigmatisation of the Polish population, the Polish foreign minister, Radosław Sikorski, qualified Cameron’s discourse as “unacceptable”. The debate over limiting freedom of movement has continuously escalated and reached a worrying level. With the EP elections approaching in May 2014, this debate is likely to become worse.

A more effective structure for the Commission. EPC Commentary, 7 March 2014

The changeover in the European Commission in autumn of this year will be one of the key factors that will determine the direction of the European Union for the coming years. The question of who will get what job, how far the European Parliament elections can influence the appointment of the Commission President (and the impact this has on the relationship between EP and the Commission), and what the new focus of the Commission will be in terms of policy priorities will all have a strong influence on EU policy for some time to come.

Reflections on the 26-27 June European Council Summit. EPC Commentary, 27 June 2014

In the end, the system of Spitzenkandidaten or Top Candidate has prevailed despite unease or even outright opposition from a number of Member States. This could be seen as a victory of the European Parliament, especially since it does now create expectations about the European Parliament strongly influencing future decisions. However, it is not straightforward: the Spitzenkandidaten process did not encourage higher participation, implying that the legitimacy question is far from answered. In addition, Member States unhappy with the EP gaining more and more powers might well look into how the powers of the EP can be curtailed in future, for example through greater involvement of national parliaments.

Missing a generation in EU politics. FutureLab Europe, April 2014

The European Union has always struggled to build a strong relation with its electorate and the results of the 2009 European elections showed that turnout is still declining but also significantly lower than in national elections. The percentage of young people that voted in these elections was even lower, with an average of 29% for the age group 18-24 and 36% for the age group 25-36. To investigate this further, FutureLab Europe carried out an online survey, asking young Europeans about their attitude towards the EU and the upcoming EP elections, with the results presented here in the report: ‘Missing a generation in EU politics’.

The policy dilemma of the unitary patent. Bruegel Working Paper 2014/13, 27 November 2014

This paper provides new evidence about the budgetary consequences – for patent offices – of the coexistence of the forthcoming Unitary Patent (UP) with the current European Patent (EP). Simulation results illustrate a dilemma between (1) high UP renewal fees to ensure enough financial income for all national patent offices (NPOs) and (2) low UP renewal fees to make the UP system affordable, with very few NPOs losing on financial revenues. The simulations help to understand the positions of several patent offices, and underline an alternative way to proceed with the negotiations while reducing financial risks for the whole system.