There was a time when nobody really cared for European polls. Voter turn-out
sank steadily between the first European parliamentary elections in 1979 from 61.99 % to 45.47 % in 2014. Candidates were widely unknown and nobody with a serious interest in a political career would run for a seat in the European Parliament (EP). Even today, very few Europeans know the names of their candidates on the ballot paper, but something has changed.
Between 23 and 26 May 2019, Europeans will cast their votes once again for the 751 seats in the European Parliament (EP) and even British voters can participate (although a majority of them decided more than two years ago that they would rather leave). Many including the French President Emmanuel Macron have deemed this ballot as a fateful election that
“will be decisive for the future” of the continent, but is it really?
For sure, the world has dramatically changed since the last polls five years ago. The still pending “Brexit” is one expression of the altering global landscape as well as the confusion and insecurity that has hit the once-so-proud continent. “There is no doubt that Europe needs to reposition itself in a changed world”, said German Chancellor Angela Merkel in
an interview on 15 May, just a week before the polls. China, Russia and the US were forcing the EU to find common positions. “The old certainties of the post-war order no longer apply”, said Merkel.
The world has dramatically changed since the last polls five years ago. The still pending “Brexit” is one expression of the altering global landscape as well as the confusion and insecurity that has hit the once-so-proud continent.
Voters are more than aware of that. A recent poll suggests that right-wing anti-EU groups will gain 14 % of seats in the new parliament. The EP therefore has started the campaign “This time I’m voting” in order to convince more citizens to cast their vote. While a higher voter turnout is surely desirable, alarmism is unwarranted. A wake-up call for some of the European mainstream parties would be in order, although voters should avoid to choose fascists as their messengers. There are other, more convincing candidates in the race, and that is the good news.
Voters are more than aware of that. A recent poll suggests that right-wing anti-EU groups will gain 14 % of seats in the new parliament. The EP therefore has started the campaign “This time I’m voting” in order to convince more citizens to cast their vote.
The bad news is that some of the main players seem determined – despite their reform-rhetoric to make sure that everything remains the same. They should not be surprised if voters call them a bluff. Despite the introduction of the so-called
Spitzenkandidaten- (or lead candidate) system in 2014, that suggests that the winning party in the elections would determine who will become President of the European Commission, reality is more complicated.
The
Spitzenkandidaten are not actually at the top of Europe-wide voter lists and can be only be elected in their respective national constituencies. The EP remains a gathering of national party delegations that does not legally have the right to elect the President of the Commission. The last word has the European Council, an un-elected body comprising the heads of states or government of the member states. The Council is currently headed by former Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk, and the latest rumour is that Angela Merkel herself might want to replace Tusk at the end of his term in November 2019.
The Spitzenkandidaten are not actually at the top of Europe-wide voter lists and can be only be elected in their respective national constituencies. The EP remains a gathering of national party delegations that does not legally have the right to elect the President of the Commission.
This in-transparent and rather undemocratic procedure is the official reason why Emmanuel Macron rejects the
Spitzenkandidaten-system. Un-officially everybody knows that the French President wants to prevent Manfred Weber, the lead candidate of the conservative European People’s Party (EPP) and Merkel’s hand-picked
Spitzenkandidat to succeed the incumbent President Jean-Claude Juncker. For this purpose, Macron and his party “La Republique en Marche” (LREM) have forged a coalition with the “Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe” (ALDE)-group.
The Liberals have, other than the EPP at least two convincing candidates for the Presidency although they are not called
Spitzenkandidat. Margrethe Vestager, the Danish European Commissioner for Competition has an excellent reputation as a gutsy European and recently convinced many voters in a TV discussion among leading candidates. Guy Verhofstadt, the former Belgian Prime Minister and current head of ALDE is also well known and has been a very active Member of the European Parliament since 2009.
The Liberals have, other than the EPP at least two convincing candidates for the Presidency although they are not called Spitzenkandidat.
In contrast, Merkel’s man Manfred Weber rather fits into the old scheme of national parties supporting second-rate politicians in Brussels in order to prevent competition. He is hardly known even in his home country Germany, and 15 years as an MEP did not change this. His lack of language-skills other than German surely does not help. One of the main reasons for choosing him seems the fact that as a member of the conservative Bavarian Christian Democrats (CSU), Weber tried his best to keep the controversial Hungarian party Fidesz of Prime Minister Victor Orban within the orbit of the EPP. An attempt that eventually failed and Fidesz was suspended. The democratic credentials of the EPP suffered as a result because it did not distance itself early enough from its member Fidesz even when Orban became increasingly illiberal and anti-semitic.
In contrast, Merkel’s man Manfred Weber rather fits into the old scheme of national parties supporting second-rate politicians in Brussels in order to prevent competition. He is hardly known even in his home country Germany, and 15 years as an MEP did not change this.
It is therefore not surprising that Angela Merkel did not campaign at all for her
Spitzenkandidat except for a few lukewarm statements in support of Weber. At the same time, Merkel rejected almost all suggestions made by Emmanuel Macron for European reforms without presenting an alternative agenda. Her pro-European rhetoric therefore rings increasingly hollow.
Other
Spitzenkandidaten are the Dutch Frans Timmermans, a Social Democrat and the German Ska Keller of the Green Party. Neither of them stands a chance to become President of the European Commission because their parties will not gain enough votes. While Timmermans is a seasoned politician and served as Foreign Minister of the Netherlands before, Keller was one of the youngest members of the MEP when she was elected for the first time in 2009 at the age on 27.
They are hardly bad choices as are some more prominent candidates such as the former Greek Finance Minister Yanis Varoufakis, founder of the Democracy in Europe (DiEM) movement that wants to make the EU a
“full-fledged democracy with a sovereign Parliament”. Or even Rachel Johnson, the sister of “Brexit”-hardliner Boris Johnson, who campaigns for the pro-European party “Change UK”.
European voters have indeed the choice between a large number of decent and capable candidates, between quicker or slower European integration and between different political ideas as well. It is important however, that processes become more transparent and candidates more visible. In this regards, the EU is not on a bad way although the old habit of back-door deals dies hard and too slowly. There is very little reason to choose other well-known names on the ballot list, such as Caio Giulio Mussonlini, a great-grandson of Italy’s fascist Dictator Benito Mussolini. Their political ideas are well known and they served the continent badly.
The views expressed above belong to the author(s). ORF research and analyses now available on Telegram! Click here to access our curated content — blogs, longforms and interviews.
PREV
