5 ways to tackle Europe’s democratic deficit

26th November, 2012 2:52 pm

There is a huge divide in Europe between its citizens and the people who make decisions. The bridging of this divide is crucial to the future of the European project.

Turnout in the first direct elections for the European Parliament in 1979 averaged 62% across the EU. In Italy it was as high as 85%. By 2009, average turnout had plummeted to 43%, with a steady decline at every election in between. UK turnout has remained consistently low, at 32% in 1979 and 34% in 2009.

The growing gulf between the public and the only democratically elected representatives in the structure of the EU may seem unfair given the corresponding increase in the Parliament’s powers from 1979 to 2009. Merely a consultative assembly in 1979, the European Parliament now has co-decision making responsibilities with the Council of Ministers in many areas of EU policy, including the setting of the EU budget.

The disconnect is in part because of the public perception that MEPs do not hold the bulk of power in the European Union, which many see as resting with Member States and the European Commission. It is also hard for people to see how their vote makes a difference. In elections to the House of Commons there is a transparent link that everyone understands between your vote and the make-up of the government. In European elections the link between your vote and the ‘government’ of Europe is opaque.

Below I have laid out five proposals that I believe may go some way to addressing the democratic deficit:

Give the European Parliament the power to adopt legislative proposals

Although the Lisbon Treaty gave the Parliament co-decision making responsibility in many areas of EU policy, the power to introduce legislation lies solely with the European Commission, with Parliament only having the ability to request that the European Commission brings forward proposals for MEPs to consider. Allowing MEPs to bring in legislation themselves would bring the European Parliament in line with national Parliaments in EU Member States and associate MEPs with the most common function understood of Members of Parliament – making laws.

Make the European Central Bank accountable to MEPs

The role of the ECB has increased exponentially since the start of the economic crisis in 2008 and following December’s European Council summit it is likely to take responsibility for the supervision of 6,000 banks across the eurozone, with the power to revoke their banking licenses, issue fines and remove members of their board. Despite this huge increase in the power of the ECB, there is virtually no democratic accountability. The Governor of the ECB visits the Parliament on a quarterly basis to answer questions, but is not bound to do so. MEPs can submit written questions to the bank for answers, but cannot call members of the board to answer questions in Parliament or influence the appointment of board members – as shown this month by the appointment of Yves Mersch to the bank’s executive board despite a vote against his appointment in the European Parliament.

The European Parliament should have the power of the UK Treasury Selection Committee to compel the Governor, board members and senior bank staff to answer questions at the Economic & Monetary Affairs Committee. As in Sweden, the Parliament should be able to dismiss executives of the bank for misconduct. Finally, appointments to the bank’s executive board should require the approval of Parliament after hearings in the ECON committee, similar to the US Senate.

Strengthen democratic oversight of the European Commission

Akin to the US Senate confirmation process, MEPs should have the power to confirm (or not) individual commissioners put forward by each Member State to briefs in the European Commission. Currently, although MEPs do question commissioners, if they don’t think one is suitable, they only have the nuclear option of rejecting the entire commission. However in reality a no vote by the European Parliament on the appointment of a commissioner would make it very difficult for him/her to take up their post. This should be formalised.

Directly elect the President of the European Commission

The European Commission is the most powerful international administration in the world. The Commission has the exclusive right to propose policy, agrees international trade deals on behalf of the EU, has extensive power in competition policy (including a veto on mergers) and ensures compliance with EU law by Member States. The Commission is often described as the ‘civil service’ of the EU, but that understates the power the Commission has. A directly elected President of the European Commission, elected at the same time as MEPs, would address a democratic black hole at the heart of the EU. Critics suggest this would politicise the Commission, but the Commission is already intensely political. Democratically electing its head would give citizens a voice at the top table in Europe and perhaps provide an answer to Kissinger’s famous question: “Who do I call when I want to talk to Europe?”

Reform the way MEPs are elected

I haven’t met anyone who thinks the way we elect MEPs works. In the North West, we have eight MEPs (including two excellent Labour ones) representing a region of over 7 million people spanning 5,500 square miles. As the EU grows, the number we have diminishes. We should look again at the electoral system to improve the link between MEPs and their constituents.

I’m not saying these measures would boost turnout in European elections by themselves. Clearly there are a range of issues that need to be addressed, but increasing democracy in the institutions of Europe and strengthening the role of our elected representatives is a good place to start.

What do you think? Tweet your ideas to @kevpeel using the hashtag #eureform.

  • http://www.facebook.com/Dan.Filson Daniel Filson

    It is a nonsense for a London MEP to be accountable, in theory, to 75 UK-size constituencies and maintain any meaningful relationship with them. Thankfully we have political parties keeping track on them, but otherwise they are as accountable to nobody as the EU Commission itself.

    Let’s make a start by urging the scrapping of the EU Parliament meting in both Strasburg and Brussels; just the latter will do.

    Then there’s the ever-rotating EU Presidency. That could be directly-elected, even though it as relatively litte power.

    We, or rather the UK red top press, denigrated Jacques Dellors even though he was possibly the finest leader of the EU it has had, whilst giving minimal coverage to the wok that Cathy Ashton did as Commissioner. And each year British ministers strut to Brussels, or wherever, to be macho about protecting British rights, posturing as if megaphone diplomacy as any virtues. We get the EU we deserve.

  • franwhi

    If Westminster and the red tops didn’t have an EU Parliament to use as a whipping boy then they’d have to make one up. The democratic deficit in European governance actually suits British politicians – they have no wish to make it any less opaque when they can use its existence to whip up the masses without having to take responsibility for EU collective decision making.

  • http://www.facebook.com/jim.crowder2 Jim Crowder

    So because people don’t want to vote for these people, we should give them more power? Surely it should be the other way round. If people don’t vote insufficient numbers, then the power given to MEPs should be reduced. Same goes for the rest of the EU. Votes tend to be given according to the power they wield, hence the low turnout for local government too.

  • Pingback: Addressing the democratic deficit in the EU | Kevin Peel Blog()

  • Pingback: Five EU reforms we should be talking about()

Latest

  • Comment Staying together for the kids

    Staying together for the kids

    Can a political party attend relationship counselling? Never mind the big tent: how big would the couch have to be? Or is the Labour party now displaying signs of having irreconcilable differences? Is it time to cut the ties, and the losses, call it a day and move on? The abuse currently being hurled in several directions hardly points to a sense of common purpose, solidarity or collective action. The anger on social media is quite something. Dip any digit […]

    Read more →
  • Comment Featured Having the ambition to put ending child poverty at the heart of leadership is why I’m backing Yvette

    Having the ambition to put ending child poverty at the heart of leadership is why I’m backing Yvette

    Leading the Labour Party is a big job, and it’s a serious job – that’s why we need a leader who brings strength and a track record to the role. Nobody doubts Yvette’s toughness or her experience, but what’s really important to me is the way she’s drawing on that experience to set out her stall for the future of our country and our party, and how that reflects her values. Yvette’s achievements in government, and as shadow home secretary, […]

    Read more →
  • Comment Featured London needs a Mayor with conviction

    London needs a Mayor with conviction

    Labour supporters have a clear choice when selecting our Mayoral candidate. We can settle for mediocrity – picking a bland candidate, who won’t rock the boat and is too scared to challenge the inequality that increasingly prevents Londoners from reaching their potential. Or we can choose a conviction politician, with real Labour values – someone not afraid to stand up to the powerful and fight for social justice and equality for all Londoners. A Mayor who will deliver a new […]

    Read more →
  • Comment Victory is what we owe to the people we represent

    Victory is what we owe to the people we represent

    In 1963 JFK prepared (but never got to deliver) a speech attacking ‘voices preaching doctrines which apparently assume that … vituperation is as good as victory.’ Reading that last phrase recently I knew immediately what he meant. Years ago, after the 1980 local elections in the wake of Thatcher’s victory, there was a view in some quarters that, even when we won control locally, we should remain in opposition to ‘teach the electorate a lesson’. The idea was that if […]

    Read more →
  • Comment How well does Labour know its own members?

    How well does Labour know its own members?

    Reading an article on ConservativeHome provided a clear demonstration of how the Conservatives have embraced technology and have left Labour behind.  Without a clear signal of intent and without significant investment in tech, the Party will be hobbled at future elections. Fundamentally, the Party does not appear to have the level of information and detail required about its own members, let alone its voters and potential voters.  Without this it cannot motivate anyone.  The ability to tailor a pitch, an […]

    Read more →
Share with your friends










Submit