electing europe magazine.compressed (1)
TRANSCRIPT
1
MAKE YOUR VOTE COUNT FOR THE 2014 ELECTION
Democracy without democratsWhat is going to happen?
Happy to be eating in Europe “Bendy banana law” and other food regulations: How much power does the EU really have?
European Parliament for beginnersA guide to the European parliament - the EP in a nutshell!
Two Aarhus University EP candidates Christian Kjølhede and Lasse Quvang Rasmussen
2
CONTENT #4
#6
#8
#10
#12
Editorial
European Parliament for beginners
Act, react, impact
What to make of Euroscepticism
The rise of the Greater Romania Party
#15
#16
#19
#22
#24
#26
Happy to be eating in Europe
Democracy without democrats
EP Candidates from AU
Electing Europe – when and who?
Shrinking the democratic deficit of the European Union
Electing Europe
EDITORS
Mette Vedel Hyldgaard Daniela Biton Cecilie Lindstrøm Rasmus Sig GuldagerEditor Editor Editor Layout and graphics
Contact us here: [email protected] credit for all photos: europarl.europa.eu
3
USE YOUR POWER.
EP14_Leaflet_GTV_A5_EN_V01.indd 1 10/03/14 11:49
4
This is the slogan for the European Parliament elections campaign. Only by voting can you make a difference in Europe. This is your privilege as an EU citizen.
From my point of view, the European elections are more important than ever.
Times have been tough in the EU. Since 2008 Europe has faced the largest economic crisis in its history and big decisions are still to be made, to secure the future of our continent and to ensure cooperation between the member states and with third countries like the USA.
As Europe emerges from the crisis we will not all agree on the way ahead and we will have different answers to the questions we face. What directions do YOU want Europe to take? How do YOU think we should face the challenges of the future? Who do YOU think should be in charge in Europe? You can answer these questions by voting in the 2014 European elections.
Act. React. Impact. The European Parliament is representing the citizens of the EU. It is your direct voice in the EU. The elections are your opportunity to make a difference. The European Parliament is giving priority to the economic crisis. The unemployment rate among the younger generations is sky high. How this problem will be handled depends on the political majority elected on May 25th.
The European Parliament elections are political. In Denmark, the 13 Danish Members of the Parliament (MEPs) will not become a national team among other European teams. In the Parliament, each MEP will be part of political groups that span from left wing to right wing. As the political shape of the Parliament will set the direction of Europe, your choice is important.
Your vote is part of the decision on which road to take in Europe. At the European Parliament Office in Denmark we hope that you will gather information, take a stand and use your democratic power. So if you vote in Denmark, make a note in your calendar for May 25th.
Whether you vote in Denmark or in another country, do not just let it slip. In Denmark you can “postal vote” until May 23rd. I hope you will take some time to figure out where you want to put your mark and that this magazine will be helpful to you.
USE YOUR POWER – CHOOSE WHO’S IN CHARGE IN EUROPE Best regards
Anne Mette VestergaardHead of the European Parliament Office in Denmark
Act. React. Impact.
You can follow the campaign online as well. www.europarl.dkTwitter: @EPiDanmark @AnneMetteEPFacebook.com/EPiDKInstagram: @epidanmark
Editorial
5
6
how does the EP work and what are we voting for?
BeginnersFor
European Parliament
What is the ep?
7
The European Parliament for beginners As a student of European Studies coming from a different background, I consider it important to explain to the readers of this magazine how the European Parliament
(EP) works and how it is structured.
During our courses, we often come across terms such as democratic deficit, ordinary legislative method, etc.; how-ever, politicians and scholars take aspects of European pol-itics for granted. Therefore I would like to give a brief over-view of the EP in this article and share some information, which might be useful in light of the upcoming EP elections.
First of all, the EP is the only directly elected institution of the European Union (EU), which means that EU citizens can have their say by elect-ing their own representatives.
There are 766 members in the EP, commonly known as MEPs, and they are elect-ed every five years in all the 28 Member States. So far so good; but how are the MEPs organized in the Parliament?
People often wonder, whether MEPs from the same country are representing the interests of their particular country and are thus grouped together, or if they are seated in alphabet-ical order or according to po-litical beliefs. Once elected, members are organized along political or ideological lines. Currently there are seven polit-ical groups in the EP, such as the European People’s Party (EPP), Group of the Progres-sive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats (S&D), and the Al-liance of Liberals and Demo-
crats for Europe (ALDE), just to name the most popular ones. As mentioned above, MEPs are organized via their political beliefs. This means that a lib-eral MEP from Italy will sit with his or her fellow liberals in the Parliament. Voting for a liberal candidate in any of the mem-ber states will thus contribute to electing MEPs who will be part of ALDE. Some MEPs, however, do not belong to any political group and are known as non-attached members.
The Parliament’s roles are laid down in the Treaties, which are the rules governing the EU. The most recent treaty adopted in 2009 was the Treaty of Lis-bon. As written on the website of the EP itself “with the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty, the European Parliament has become a powerful co-legisla-tor and plays a determining role in shaping European policies”.
The European law-making pro-cedure is rather complicated, but in a nutshell, the European Commission proposes laws, which are then adopted jointly by the EP and the Council. This signifies that the two latter in-stitutions act as a sort of “two chamber system”. They make amendments and adopt or reject the proposals received when it
is their turn. To name an exam-ple, the joint decision-making powers between the EP and the Council come into effect when adopting the EU budget.
Moving to some less formal and more curious aspects of the EP, I find it impossible not to mention the multilingual-ism, which reflects the cultur-al and linguistic diversity of the EU. All the EU languages are considered equally im-portant and MEPs can speak their own languages in many sessions because interpre-tation services are provided. Moreover, all the documents are published in all the official languages of the EU to make them available to the citizens.
Despite its growing powers, the European Parliament is still not very well known to people. In-formation about the institution, so it seems, is not targeted effectively to reach Europe-an citizens, not even in times of elections. It is therefore not surprising that many Europe-ans seem unaware of the in-fluence they have in shaping the EP and future of Europe; “a vote in the European elections is every citizen’s chance to in-fluence the shape of the Parlia-ment and the decisions it takes over its five year mandate”.
By: Sofia SimoncelliBachelor’s Degree in Linguistic and CultureUniversity of Padua, ItalyEmail: [email protected]
8
By: Mariam TirkiaBachelor in International Relations at Tbilisi State University, Georgia. MA European Studies AU
ACT - REACT - IMPACTDespite the achievements of the European integration, the decreasing turnout in the European Parliament elections illustrates that many Europeans have become
disenchanted with the: EUThe European Commission identified the reform of Euro-pean governance as one of its four strategic objectives in early 2000; openness, partic-ipation, accountability, effec-tiveness, and coherence have been considered major prin-ciples of good governance.
In order to stay connected with the citizens, the EU has been seeking to communicate European issues more open-ly with its citizens and en-gage more Europeans in the European project.
Weak decision-making pow-ers of the European Parliament constitute one of the five main claims through which the demo-cratic deficit in the EU is defined. The argument that the Europe-an Parliament is too weak has prevailed among most analysts of the democratic deficit. The European citizens have high expectations of the EU, how-ever, the level of participation in the European election does not reflect these expectations, giving rise to the image of the European parliament as be-ing an illegitimate institution.
On the other hand, successive EU treaties have increased the powers of the only directly-elect-ed EU body. The Lisbon Treaty enhanced the EP’s powers as a co-legislator with the Council with increased budgetary pow-ers. For the first time in the 2014 European elections the nation-al governments are sharing the agenda-setting power in the appointment of the European Commission with the Europe-an Parliament. Pan-European EP elections in May 2014 are empowering European citizens to indirectly choose the next President of the EU executive.
In order to raise public aware-ness about the importance of the upcoming elections, the Eu-ropean Parliament has launched its awareness campaign known as “This time it’s different”. The information campaign sends a strong message to European citizens: “Act, React, Impact.”
It seeks to actively encourage Eu-ropean citizens to exercise their right to vote, decide for Europe, and have an impact on Europe. The EP’s institutional campaign emphasizes that through deter-
mining the political majorities in the EP, European citizens are shaping and redefining the type of Europe they wish to live in. The campaign tools, which the EP has at its disposal for the 2014 European elections, indi-cate that it seeks to illustrate the direct impact every European citizen has on Europe. Analysis of the campaign’s visual media suggests that in order to solve the most concerning issues for Eu-ropean citizens, the EP needs a strong mandate from its citizens.
Therefore, the campaign seeks to communicate with European electorates, raising their aware-ness to the fact, that they are more influential than ever before.
It encourages European voters to contribute to the direction that Europe takes in the future in tack-ling political, economic, social or other issues impacting the lives of European citizens. The main objective of the EP’s institutional campaign is to inform European citizens that they are the main architects of the EU’s future and therefore they have a significant stake in the process of building a Europe they wish to live in.
9
MAKE ANIMPACT ON YOUR LIFE.www.EUROPARL.EU#EP2014
10
What to make of Euroscepticism?Self-awareness of the European Union and the need to justify its existence has been a constant struggle for the European Union but even more so for the European Parliament.
Written by: Avto Koridze, European Studies MA, [email protected]
“I make legislation, therefore I exist,” has almost become an unofficial motto for the world’s biggest democratically elected institution.
The growth of its powers, it looks like, has only increased the counter-force that tries to take it down, rather than ac-tually strengthen its position among the population.
Pro-European voters are not impressed with the EP any more than before, while anti-European voters have found new reasons to fight back. Eurosceptic, or rather anti-European parties have greatly benefited from the rise of anti-European sentiment and it looks like they are going to capitalize from such voter opinions.
Euroscepticism has been around for a while and it seems to be ever-growing. Part of it lies in widening the electoral base. If, in the begin-ning, the EU was construct-ed and seen as cooperation between business elites,
implementing and broadening of democratic elements has resulted in engagement of ‘blue collar’ workers that have less access to Europe and its services; they travel less, do not take part in educational programs for young people, are not involved in trans-Euro-pean businesses, and do not migrate for work, but rather see immigration as a threat to their economic standing and job market.
On the other part, political parties have seen and seized opportunity of such scepticism and have further contributed to politicization of the debate about European integration, or rather de-integration. Even traditionally pro-European countries, such as Germany, have seen a rise of Euroscep-tic parties in recent years.
However, nothing ever seems to come out of such Euroscep-ticism, especially not at the European level in the Europe-an Parliament.
The Eurosceptics are not
renowned for their legislative behaviour. The procedural rules that strengthen the political groups further marginalize small Eurosceptic groups. Coopera-tion between the Eurosceptic parties in the EP is minimal and they, time after time, fail to unite as one political group, due to their different values and stances.
Euroscepticism, it seems, is not a strong enough driver to unite these parties. Western European Eurosceptics differ greatly from their Eastern European counterparts who are less worried about immigration.
However, the consequences of Euroscepticism can be felt on national levels. The EP elections play a double-edged sword in these matters. They remain, on the one hand, second-order elections in the sense that the struggle be-tween the political parties is chained to the local constitu-encies; however, on the other hand, the rise of Euroscepti-
11
cism and Eurosceptic parties contributed to the incorpora-tion of the debate Brussels vs. national capitals on the local level, it has not only enhanced the Eurosceptic party stand-ings but have moved tradition-al, bigger parties towards more Eurosceptic positions than before.
At the same time, the Euro-sceptic parties have widened their programs and are trying to reach out to the voters of the traditional parties, at least on the European Parliament elections. To be short and frank, it looks like the general Euroscep-ticism has become the only European issue that is present at the European Parliament elections.
The rise of Eurosceptics can be attributed to various inter-national and European circum-stances. Economic crisis has
further strengthened stagna-tion and scepticism towards traditional, bigger parties and political elites, contributing the rise of the far right and populist parties.
Euroscepticism is nothing but a continuation of this anti-elite, populist movement fed from frustration of global economic and political crisis.
On the other hand, the EU has moved from an initial de-politi-cization direction, where it was seen as an administrative rath-er than political agent, to trying to solve the democratic deficit problem, and consequently, to politicization of the issues debated at the European level.
2014 elections are not expect-ed to be very different in these matters. Eurosceptics will probably further gain seats in the EP but without being able
to derail the European Par-liament’s legislative activities; the Eurosceptics activities will be limited to short speeches to undermine the legitimacy of the EP.
The main problem emerges when traditional par-ties are pushed towards Euro-scepticism for which there is no easy solution. Bigger parties can either address the issue and play to Euroscepticism of these parties, but with a softer posi-tion, or can try to wait out until the Euroscepticism somehow brushes over and the voters become sceptical towards these parties, as they become more established and part of the political elite.
Picture from inside the European Parliament
12
The Rise of the Greater Romania Party Modern Romanian nationalism and European
Parliamentary Elections
First, however, we should go back twenty five years, to see how it all started. In 1989, revolution ended Ceausescu’s regime and gave Romanians “the flavor of pol-itics” together with universally celebrated freedoms of thought, expression and association.
The monopoly of state as opinion-shaping in-stitution was under-mined, and a number of new media sourc-es appeared, among which was the newspa-per Romania Mare (Greater Romania) of Corneliu Vadim Tudor, that within four months since its first issue jumped to a circulation of 600,000 cop-ies per week, thus becoming the biggest Romanian weekly.
In 1991 Tudor founded the par-ty with the same name. And this choice of name was anything but accidental. Greater Roma-nia is a highly symbolic refer-ence to the interwar territory of
Romania, which was the largest ever and included parts of what is now Ukraine and Moldova.
Irredentism typical to nation-alist movements is not un-common to the GRP, which “militates for peaceful real-ization of Greater Romania
within its historical borders”.
The emblem of the party, show-ing an eagle carrying a cross, or Aquila Valachica, is described as the symbol of “national awakening” and “continuity and Latin origin of Romanian peo-ple”. Obvious mythologization of the past and ancestry is one of the means that the GRP un-ceasingly uses to sustain sym-bolic anchor for ethnocentric national Romanian identity.
The message that the party and its leadership sends out clearly places it within the “organized intolerance” of radical right, or, since the GRP sees itself as a center-left party with national doctrine, the term “brown left” might be more appropriate.
Corneliu Vadim Tudor, the party founder and leader did a great job in portraying Romanian society “as divided and conflict-ridden: the ‘peo-ple’ against the corrupted elite or against an enemy
within”. The GRP has no lack of “adversaries”: Romanian Hungarians, Roma and Jews have been receiving unlimited attention from Tudor and his party since its very foundation:
“However, in talking about the descendants of those barbar-ians, I do not think that we of-fend the Magyar nation; quite on the contrary, we dissemi-nate authentic, historical doc-uments, attesting to the fact
The next European Parliament (EP) is said to become even more polarized, with losses for centrist parties and gains for the far-left and far-right. Expected growth of support for both extremes of the political spectrum makes it worth-while to have at least a quick look at some of the radical parties; the choice here being the Greater Romania Party (GRP), which now holds three seats in the EP.
“I will deny it until I die, because
i love my people
13
that they were originally prim-itives, something which Ro-manians have never been”
“They [Roma] attack as a group, control the markets, and the only reason why they do not rape their chil-dren and parents is that they are too busy raping ours.There was no Holo-caust in Romania. “I will deny it until I die, because I love my people.”
By reinforcing anti-Hungari-an and anti-Roma discourse, and denial of ethnic cleans-ing of over 200,000 Jews and forced deportation of Roma under Antonescu’s rule, Tudor presents his party as “most systematically pro-Antones-cu organization of all”. These statements are not single cas-es, however; chauvinistic dis-course became a primary fea-ture of party branding. In fact, Tudor himself is widely recog-nized as the court poet who praised Ceausescu and his national communism regime.
The GRP recruited a number of people with high social profiles; interesting, however, is the membership of so called “token figures” with high symbolic val-ue aimed at creating an illusion that the party is not xenophobic and racist. These are the un-usual members – starting from ethnic Hungarian Iuliu Furo to the black party member from Guinea Abubucar Mangue Camara, all of whom appear in public events of the GRP.
The external others are also present in the GRP’s discourse; the party position towards EU and NATO is very ambiguous.
Being the most Eurosceptic Ro-manian party, it argues, how-ever, that Europe has a moral obligation towards Romania for the protection services it provid-ed by fighting Ottomans during the reign of Stephen the Great, while other historians say that it is yet another mythological manipulation of history, since Romania was a political con-cept tailored only in the second half of the nineteenth century. NATO was called a four-let-ter disease like AIDS at times, while in other instances, the GRP offered full support for Ro-mania’s accession to the treaty.
Putting the party image aside, it is necessary just to mention that it has been and still is a very active player in Roma-nian politics, being present in Romanian Parliament from 1992 to 2008, and becoming the biggest opposition party in 2000. It had five seats in the EP in 2007 and three in 2009. Even though the party as no national representation now, it is far from being forgotten.
To finish up, I will say that the time of instability and public frustration is known to be per-fect for the rise of extreme na-tionalism, which offers simplis-tic explanations of and solutions to social, economic and politi-cal problems, mostly by blam-ing the corrupt government and the anti-national elements.
So, looking at the 2012 pro-tests in Romania caused by
the austerity measures taken by the Government in 2010, as the result of deep economic crises, and growing disillusions with the EU, I am extremely interested and worried at the same time, to see how well the Greater Romania Party will do in the upcoming EP elections.
By: Alexandr HriptunBA in English Language and Literature, European Studies MAEmail: [email protected]
14
European Studies Project 2014
”Electing Europe”
Student Research Conference
20 May 2014, 9.15-‐18.00
Nobel Parken 1453/223 and 1453/227
YOU ARE INVITED TO THIS EVENT
In May 2014, citizens of t
he 28 European Union member states will elect their
representatives to the European Parliament (EP). Elections ar
e rituals in democratic political
systems that can be studied from multiple perspectives.
This includes the way democracy is
interpreted by voters and candidates, an
d the different political topics of the cam
paign.
Elections can be studied as history, identi
ty politics, or power games. The orchestration of
elections depends on several groups, fro
m civil servants to political parties and volu
nteers
involved with organising campaign events. These elections constitute
the focus of the 2014
European Studies MA Project.
In ”Electing Europe”
, students explore the EP elections from a range of perspect
ives relevant
to European Studies, and will present their work at the Student R
esearch Conference.
UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES DO YOU WANT TO MISS THESE TWO KEYNOTE TALKS
Lisanne Wilken, Associate Prof
essor, European Studies
”Europe nul points? Reflections of Europ
e in light of the Eurovision election”
Claudia Leskien, PhD-‐candidate, Europea
n Studies
”Hosting Europe. Vocation européenne a
nd Banal Europeanism in Strasbourg”
An updated program
me will be available prior to the conference.
Course responsible:
Ann-‐Christina L. Knudsen ([email protected]) and Morten Johannes
Winstrup Hansen ([email protected]) The 2014 ES
Project cooperates with the European
Parliament’s Information Office in Denmark (www.europarl.dk). The ev
ent is co-‐sponsored by
Europa-‐Nævnet.
i will be there!Are you coming too?
INVITATION
15
Happy to be eating in EuropeThe discourse of democratic deficit in the EU is not a new phenomenon, but
now that the European Parliament elections are approaching, the discussions seem to intensify.
One of the things that has been on the minds of many these days is voter turnout and the legitimization of EU powers.
Despite all efforts the Europe-an Parliament puts into pro-moting the elections, the EU is still something distant to the vast majority of its citizens.
We can find many reasons for that. However, I want to point out one fact that, in my opinion, plays a role in the disconnec-tion between the EU institu-tions and the general public. I am talking about the tenden-cy to take things for granted.
Everyday thousands of Europe-ans shop, cook and eat without even giving much thought to how certain food reach their ta-ble or the fact that EU regulates many steps of food produc-tion, packaging and labeling.
The objective of food laws and food safety policies is to pro-tect consumer health and in-terests. Safety is being guar-anteed not only on the EU level, but also when it comes to imports from third countries. Moreover, if the laws were not enough, there is even a Eu-ropean Food Safety Authori-ty, that (among other institu-tions) is ‘committed to ensuring that Europe’s food is safe’.Countless institutions with
confusing names and ‘ben-dy banana law’ might put a grin on ones face. In many occasions, however, I can-not help but feeling lucky.
Take Genetically Modified Or-ganism’s (GMO) for instance. The EU, all GMOs must receive authorization before they en-ter the market. This applies to GMOs used in food, feed and seed for GM crops. While the policy might have some flaws, there is no doubt that Europe-an rules are quite strict com-pared to some other countries. The EU is prioritizing consum-ers’ health and is focusing on freedom of choice, as well as transparency and information. The United States, on the other hand have a different approach and the US Food and Drug Ad-ministration is often criticized by the green community. Vari-ous publications comparing the amounts of banned chemicals, pesticides and other substanc-es is a clear indication of the higher quality of food in Europe.
In June 2007, EU regulation on Registration, Evaluation, Authorization and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH) en-tered into force. REACH ad-
dresses the production and use of chemical substances, and their potential impacts on both human health and the en-vironment. It took seven years to pass the regulation and US interest groups were lobby-ing heavily during that time.
Even though the legislation did not fully satisfy environ-mentalists, it was a very im-portant step towards a greener Europe. Today 1,328 chem-ical substances are banned in the EU, while many Ameri-can companies are still using a lot of them in the production of food packaging, cosmetics and items of personal hygiene.
Whether you live in Glasgow or Varna, Stockholm or Paler-mo; whether you are young or old, Eurosceptic or not – the EU is effecting your life, your business, your workplace.
Think about this the next time you pick up your gro-ceries at the supermarket.
This May you can vote for the Europe you want to
be a part of.
By: Laura CiuksyteBachelor of Law, MA European StudiesEmail: [email protected]
16
Hate is rising as a legitimate flag, without people caring about the
consequences. Paul-Marie Coûteaux, a local candidate of Le Front National (France), has proposed the restoration of concentration camps for Roma people, and the citi-zens of the European Union do not rebel against this vio-lation of our Human Rights.
The ultra right-wing party “Svoboda”, known for its neo-fascist past, is dominant in the Ukraine and the EU leaders seem happy as long as Rus-sia does not have any say in Ukrainian policies. The conser-vative Spanish government has recovered razor wires in the Melilla fence on the very bor-der with Morocco to deter im-migrants who want to fulfill their European dream, without any strong intervention from the EU.
The emergence of fascism and right-wing parties in Europe is very closely related to the fact that we, the peoples of Eu-rope, do not understand the features of the neoliberal sys-
tem and its complexity. There are many reasons for that.
One of the most important is the “culturalization” of the cri-sis that makes people blame culture instead of the neolib-eral regime. It implies the ne-cessity to see the problem in the behavior of others’, often in minorities or immigrants’.
Scholars from the Marxist tradi-tion of economics and Keynes-ian economists emphasized the structural and ideological aspects of the ongoing crisis. Also, according to Kotz, history has repeatedly shown that each systemic capitalist crisis is fol-lowed by a thorough restructur-ing of the accumulation process.
Right now, some parties and media have contributed to creating a hegemonic narra-tive based on the naturaliza-tion of the capitalist system. They take for granted the capi-talist character of the economic process and give cultural expla-nations to the current bankrupt-cies. As a result, Mylonas has claimed in his article about the
media covering of the Greek sovereign debt crisis, that Greeks are profiled as “eco-nomic villains of the Eurozone”. Thus, “cultural racism per-forms the same task as bio-logical racism within culture functioning the same way as nature, creating closed and bounded cultural groups”.
According to Batsis, the idea that corruption and clientelism are the sources of the crisis is completely ideological. This understanding is linked to the argument that poverty is de-served since poor people are not working hard enough, they are not civilized enough, or corruption runs in their fami-lies. These arguments serve to justify a punishment to these people based on anti-la-bour and anti-welfare politics. These measures are promot-ed in the Treaty on Stability, Coordination and Governance in the Economic and Mon-etary Union (T/SCG 2011).
Therefore we may consider the crisis in Southern Europe-an countries as part of a sys-
The rise of fascism in Europe
Europe is sinking. It does not matter how much sorrow it’s history has already shown. Everybody seems so blind.
DEMOCRACY WITHOUT DEMOCRATS
17
temic crisis; in other words, it is one of the consequences of private accumulation that needs public debts to repro-duce itself and not a result of corruption and clientelism only.
In the case of Spain corruption cannot only be found in the Spanish government, whose sovereign debt was 60% at the beginning of the crisis, thus not exceeding the maximum level defined in the Treaty of Stability, but also from German banks which were feeding into the Spanish property bubble.
According to the scholar Vi-cenç Navarro, the problem became evident when Ger-man banks stopped providing credit to Spanish banks. Thus, austerity measures were im-posed on the Spanish society in order to pay back the debt owed to the European banks.
These neoliberal measures were chosen by the non-di-rectly elected institutions that comprise The Troika (the Eu-ropean Commission, the Eu-ropean Central Bank and the International Monetary Fund). This very attitude follows the EU pattern founded by Jacques Delors, who stated that “the people weren’t ready to agree to integration, so you had to get on without telling them too much about what was happening” .
It goes without saying that these neoliberal solutions limit people’s rights, by tak-ing advantage of what is
known among scholars as the “passive consent of public”. This means that the non-di-rectly elected institutions are making political decisions on behalf of Spanish citizens, however, the citizens have not elected the institutions, nor the people making the policies.
So what kind of legitimacy can these policies have in the eyes of the Spanish people?I see two main problems that contribute to the rise of fascism. The first one is the fact that, by understanding the crisis as a cultural problem, it is easier to blame people who belong to cul-tures, which are considered un-able to manage their resources. Laziness and poverty, as well as corruption and cli-entelism are usually relat-ed to the South and East. Therefore, a way to protect the West and the North is to emphasize their own cul-ture and build walls to make their countries impermeable, as right-wing parties in Nor-dic countries are suggesting (e.g. Danish People’s Party). The Spanish government is playing a similar role regard-ing its Southern neighbors by keeping a dangerous for-tress at its frontiers in Africa.
The inability of political parties to solve the crisis and the fact they are allowing non-directly-elected institutions to decide for them give rise to anti-po-litical party discourse and the idea that all political parties are the same. And it is there-
in I see the second issue.
This in turn explains why those parties, which define them-selves as apolitical (such as Le Front National and Five Start Movement in Italy) are getting the sympathy of peo-ple. Both Marine le Pen and the Italian comedian Beppe Grillo have repeatedly stated that their respective parties are neither right-wing nor left-wing. This apolitical discourse has already been used by the fas-cist parties at the beginning of the 20th century; Adolf Hitler in Germany, Benito Mussolini in Italy and José Antonio Pri-mo de Rivera of the Spanish Falange all refused to include themselves in the right-left di-chotomy and thus became “anti-party” movements, as opposed to most of the ortho-doxies of left, right and center. All in all, democracy seems more vulnerable in the old continent.
It is no time to point on our difference but to stand united and help each other, maybe by creating a Solidarity Europe-an Fund as the Nobel laureate Stiglitz suggested; maybe by changing the rules of the Euro-pean Union; or maybe by com-bating the democratic deficit.
The most democratic tool we have at hand, which enables us to make a difference in Europe-an politics, is our right to vote – and we will get the chance to ex-ercise this right at the European Parliament election this May.
By: Iria Ameixeiras Cundins BA in Journalism, MA in International RelationsEuropean Studies Email: [email protected]
18
STUDY ABROAD?
EVER CONSIDERED STUDYING ABROAD?
Did you know that AU has more than 700 partnership
agreements with universities around the world?
that we have.
st
th
at the International Centre on the 8th
International Centre
Dale T. Mortensen Building
Høegh-Guldbergs Gade 4, Bldg. 1650
8000 Aarhus C
AARHUS
UNIVERSITY AU
www.au.dk/rejsud
+45 8715 0220
www.fb.com/RejsUd
ABROADSTUDY
19
EP CANDIDATE #1 Christian KjølhedeName: Christian KjølhedeAge: 24Occupation: MA student at Finance, Aarhus UniversityNational party: Danish Social-Liberal PartyEP Group: ALDE Key Issues: •The EU legal institutions must give higher priority to development of Europe’s infrastructure in the forthcoming EU budget with a clearly green dimension. •Research, youth and education with additional higher financial prioritisation. •A phasing out of subsidies to farmers within the next budget period. Facebook: facebook.com/KjoelhedeEUWeb: www.kjoelhede.eu
Born in the Western part of Denmark, I now live and study in Aarhus. As an MA student in finance, cand.merc., I have a professional and personal interest in economic matters, especially in a Euro-pean and global scale. Also, my profound interest in EU politics combined with my long-time political engagement in the Danish Social-Liberal Party have helped me gain a favourable position towards the upcoming EP election in 2014. I have already now an array of policies on e.g. the internal mar-ket, financial institutions, green growth, the CAP (Common Agricultural Policy), democracy in EU and much more.
What is your vision for the EP?
My long term vision for the European Parliament is to make it the only instance of power for the EU as it directly represents the voice of the European people. To get towards this goal, the EU of course needs to work closer together than they are today and think of Europe as a whole. But in time this will be the way to give the legitimacy to the European Parliament and make it possible for citizens to vote for all candidates and not only those running in their own member state. This will make the political agenda that of Europe and in the end benefit all member states the most.
What is the most important EP issue at the moment?
The most important current challenge comes from the effects of the financial crisis. Only be work-ing close together we can fight the high depth of the countries in Southern Europe and at the same time regain stability and confidence in the financial sector, ensure growth and employment all over Europe by investing in the future and by doing so pursue lower emmissions of pollution and CO2, higher energy efficiency, faster cross-boarder transportation and increased competitiveness for en-trepreneurs and corporations in the EU.
20
EP CANDIDATE #2 Lasse Quvang Rasmussen
Name: Lasse Quvang RasmussenAge: 24Occupation: Student at Political Science, Aarhus UniversityNational party: Social DemocratsEP Group: S&D GroupKey Issues: •Anti-austerity •Youth unemployment •Job creation through green investments Facebook: facebook.com/lassequvang.dkWeb: www.lassequvang.dk
My name is Lasse Quvang Rasmussen. I am a 24-year old student at Political Science, Aarhus University. Besides that, I am working in a part time job for the Social Democrats in the city council. I grew up in Lund outside of Horsens where I went to school and high school, but I have lived in Aarhus the last 4 years.
What is your vision for the EP?
I live and breathe for creating equal rights for all. It is a political fight that is to be fought on all ac-counts – especially in the EU. There is a big difference between right and left wing, and this differ-ence affects us all. I will work for social democratic solutions to our common challenges in Europe. We shall secure a fair distribution of the responsibility for the crisis. We also need to make sure that all the unemployed get a job as soon as possible and that human beings and the environment always are more import-ant than the market.The EU is both a project of possibilities and challenges. Through EU, we get even more possibilities concerning both jobs and education. In EU we must fight the challenges that break borders – but we can only do this if we do it together.
What is the most important EP issue at the moment?
There is an urgent need for a new crisis management in the EU. The right wing proposes a crisis policy with budgetary constraints that will result in massive cuts in European welfare states. We should rather work our way out of the crisis with sound investments in climate, infrastructure and education. It will create jobs right now for the thousands of unemployed Europeans. The requirements for financial markets must be tightened to prevent future crises. We should re-quire more transparent and better padded banks to prevent future crises. We also need to introduce a European financial tax, so that those who initially caused the crisis also contribute to the bill for the crisis.
21
As EU Careers Ambassador to Aarhus University it is my job to actively inform students about careers and traineeships with the EU Institutions and opportunities to apply for EU Careers selection procedures.
Contact me to schedule a presentation or private counselling.
E-‐mail: [email protected]
Mette V. Hyldgård EU Careers Ambassador
22
ELECTING EUROPE - WHEN AND WHO?We are now approaching 35 years since the initial direct elections to the European Parliament.
At age 35, people are general-ly expected to be settled down or at least well into a career – to be on track, if you will. But how old is the EP exactly? Set-ting the 1979 advent of direct elections as a sort of “Stunde Null” is apparently the story the official EP website prefers.
In a major overhaul some years ago, the EP removed the abili-ty to systematically see MEPs who served prior to the in-troduction of direct elections (though directly elected MEPs who had served before 1979 have their earlier service listed).
The EP website presents those MEPs elected in 1979 as those of ‘the 1st parliamentary term’. This notion of the “first term” being that of the first directly elected EP is even reflected in the coding of the archives of the EP where documents from 1958-‘79 bear the prefix PE0 (Parlement Européen 0).
If we, then, were to follow the archivists, the EP is perhaps not a 35-year old, but a rather more mature 56-year old. A yet earlier birth date would be to include the Common Assem-bly of the European Coal and Steel Community, resulting in the EP nearing retirement at age 62. This confusion of the EP’s “birthday” is indicative of
the many perspectives and sometimes conflicting (hi)sto-ries that can be told of the EP.
Let us take the EP’s own narra-tive and a closer look at the initial direct EP elections of 1979. Like good journalists, we might as well take up “the Danish angle”.
Who were these Danish MEPs elected to the ‘the 1st parlia-mentary term’? One difference from this year’s EP elections was the one seat to be con-tested in Greenland (won by a Catholic priest from the Social Democratic party Siumut), as Greenland left the EC in 1986.
In terms of age, gender and edu-cation, Danish MEPs elected in 1979 were on average 48 years old, most (61%) were men, and 50% held Master’s degrees. By comparison, their col-leagues in the Danish parlia-ment, the Folketing, elected in 1977 and 1979 were on aver-age 49.4 and 47.1 years old, but even more likely to be men (83% in 1977 and 76% in 1979).
By contrast, these MFs (Mem-bers of the Folketing) were far more likely to have no high school diploma (50-55%) than to hold a Master’s degree (30%).
In terms of political experi-ence of the 1979 MEPs, 56%
had been MFs prior to be-coming MEPs, while 25% had been cabinet ministers, and 19% had already been MEPs.
If we flashed forward 30 years to the 2009 EP election, the average age of MEPs had not changed markedly (47.5 years), nor had the propor-tion holding Master’s de-grees (46%). By contrast, there was now only slightly more men (54%) than women.
As for political experience, MEPs of 2009 were far less likely (38%) to have experience as MFs, not to speak of as cab-inet ministers (8%), but more likely to have prior experience as MEPs (54%). However, in the same time MFs have in-creasingly been likely to have Master’s degrees (up to 35% in the 1990s and estimated at 41% following the 2007 elec-tion), and women also gained ground (up to 38% and 39% in the 2007 and 2011 elections).
Also, the average age of MFs is now below that of MEPs.
In sum, MEPs today look like those of 1979 in terms of high-er education, but so do to-day’s MFs, in contrast to their predecessors of the 1970s.
Women are more likely to be-
23
AU CAREER ARTSIS READY TO SERVE YOU!
Do you wonder:Which jobs does my education qualify me for? How do I get a student job? How do I describe my competences? How do I write a good CV or cover letter? Or do you have other career related questions? AU Career, Arts is there to help you!
dream job:
- Individual career counselling- Career related events- Feedback on CV and cover letter
VISIT US CONTACT US
Jens Chr. Shous Vej 2Nobel ParkenBuilding 1484, room 2028000 Aarhus C
[email protected] 2359
WEB
- Job bank- Samarbejde med erhvervslivet- Og meget mere!
career.au.dkjobbank.au.dkfacebook.com/aucareerarts
come either MF or MEPs to-day than in 1979, but are still more likely to become MEPs than MFs. MEPs are on aver-age about the same age today as in 1979, but their MF col-leagues are markedly young-er. However, the average age disguises the fact that the three youngest MEPs in 2009 were aged 25, 28 and 34, while in 1979 they were 30, 31 and 38. In contrast to their 1979 predecessors, MEPs of 2009 likely already had experience as MEPs but not as MFs, and were very unlikely to have been cabinet ministers. Part of this can probably be ascribed to the prohibition of dual nation-al and EP mandates effective from the 2009 EP elections, but also part of a longer term trend splitting off of a career
as an MEP from that of an MF.In terms of the division be-tween various political parties, the 1979 EP elections saw 7 parties elected, one more than in 2009. In 1979, the four largest parties were the Peo-ple’s Movement against the EC (4 of the 16 seats) the So-cial Democrats and Liberals (3 seats each) and the Conserva-tives (2 seats). 30 years later, it was the Social Democrats who took the lions share with 4 of the 13 seats, followed by 3 Liberals and 2 seats each for Socialist People’s Party and the Danish People’s Party.
By contrast, the People’s Move-ment had to make do with a single seat, just as the Conser-vatives. Thus, with the waning of the People’s Movement, the
party spectrum of Danish MEPs anno 2009 looked a bit more like that of the Folketing than it had in 1979, though, curiously, the Social Liberals failed to gain any seats at either election.
As with the varied answers to the question of the age of the EP, the changes among MEPs are diverse. On certain issues they resemble MFs more than they used to, but the two ca-reers are less likely to overlap. However, it is worth remember-ing that it is not only voters who can “elect Europe”, but also pol-iticians. Indeed, MFs may do so through parliamentary assem-blies, e.g. the Nordic Council or the Parliamentary Assem-bly of the Council of Europe.
Written by: Morten Johannes Winstrup Hansen Ph.D. Student and Scientific Assistant at Aarhus University, European Studies
24
SHRINKING THE DEMOCRATIC DEFICIT OF THE EUROPEAN UNION
European citizens feel detached from the institutions and the process of European integration. Most citizens lack the incentive to cast their vote at the 2014 elections to the European Parliament. Therefore, wthe EU stands upon a problem that can be explained in terms of a lack of legitimacy.
By: Sophie Ødgaard Nielsen & Maria Mundt, INTERNATIONAL POLITIK – NU.
The European Union has out-grown its original purpose, and developed further beyond what its founders could have dreamed of in 1957, and into something EU sceptics would never have imagined. The European Union continues to expand geographically to-wards Eastern Europe, and in regard to supranational policy.
The inclusion of new member states that differ from Den-mark in respect to political and cultural identity, and the transfer of sovereignty on dif-ferent policy issues, as for example environmental taxa-tion and the distribution of the Danish welfare to other Eu-ropean citizens, force us to question the very democratic qualities of the unique institution-al setup of the European Union.
The Question of a Democratic Deficit
The question of a democratic deficit in the European Union is first and foremost a ques-tion about whether the institu-tions of the European Union lack legitimacy. That is, wheth-er we recognize the deci-sion-making and policies of the European Union as justified.
In respect to the complexi-ty and lack of transparency of
the decision making process of the European Union, Europe-an citizens, in general, find it to be difficult to gain access to the decision making process, and through this influence the decisions that affect us all.
This problem applies to the European Commission, Eu-ropean Council, and the Eu-ropean Parliament. However, the forthcoming May elections to the European Parliament give citizens of the EU mem-ber states an opportunity to gain influence on the course of the European integration.
An Institutional Weaker Alternative
Like our general election in Denmark, members of the European Parliament are elected by popular vote.
Numerous candidates from all over the European Union run for election to the Par-liament, and they are elect-ed for a five-year term.
The candidates run for differ-ent political parties, and vote in favour of these parties when in Parliament, not by country. In this regard elections to the Eu-ropean Parliament resemble the general elections in Denmark. The Parliament constitutes
alongside the European Council the legislative pow-er of the European Union. However, the legislative power of the European Union is substan-tially different to the legislative power of national parliaments.
The European Parliament does not have the right to legislative initiative, which instead lies with the European Commis-sion. In contrast to the Euro-pean Parliament, the peoples of the European Union have not elected the Commissioners of the European Commission.
Both bodies affect legislation but the right of initiative lies with an institution that is not direct-ly accountable to the people. The European Parliament thereby differs from the na-tional parliaments of the Eu-ropean Union in a crucial way.
This results inter alia in the reluctance to give up part of our national legislative sover-eignty to what seems to be a weaker legislative institution.
The European Union not only regulates legislation. The Eu-ropean Union also redistrib-utes funds between member states, for example subsidies in support of French agricul-ture. This tells us that there are a number of reasons to seek
25
information about how the EU makes decisions, and import-ant reasons to cast your vote.
The Democratic Potential of the European Parliament
A look into the history of the European Parliament shows that the power of the Parliament has increased with every signed treaty.
The question of democratic defi-cit in the European Union has lingered on since the European integration process started, and the Maastricht, Amsterdam, Nice and Lisbon treaties have all contributed to an improve-ment of democratic legitimacy in the European Parliament.
The Lisbon Treaty improves citizen access to the demo-cratic community in the EU by creating a right to initiative, and by recognizing the impor-tance of dialogue between the European institutions and the people of the European Union.
This tells us that even though the European Parliament does not have the same amount of legislative power as national parliaments, the development within EU shows that the Eu-ropean Parliament is a parlia-ment with a growing potential.
Shrinking the Democratic Deficit
Voting is essential to every democratic process. By cast-ing your vote you gain influ-ence on the Union’s position on different policy issues in regard to the financial cri-ses, the global environmen-tal challenges, and even the overall position on the course
of the European integration.
After the election in 2009 the transparency and legitimacy of the elections to the Europe-an Parliament are growing as a result of an increased focus on the individual candidates. As with general elections in Denmark, the election to the Parliament is not simply a question of ”yes” or ”no” to the European Union.
Among the candi-dates are both scep-tics and supporters of the Union – even sceptic supporters –, which means that even sceptics have a reason to cast their vote at the election, as it is an opportu-nity to express an attitude towards the increased Eu-ropean integration.
That is why vot-ing at the election in May is not nec-essarily a vote for ‘more EU’, but an opportunity to make your voice heard.
This year the Dan-ish candidates has an increased focus on making the elec-tion process more transparent for the first time voter, and showing how Den-mark fits into the European picture.
If the election re-sults in a greater voter turnout than in previous years,
and the candidates are able to spark debate and deliberation, it will be a step towards shrink-ing the democratic deficit.
However, this relies on whether Danish voters will use their democratic right to vote at the European Par-liament election on May 25.
26
ELECTING EUROPE On May 25th, we stand before an important decision. Not only are we going to elect our Danish representatives to the European Parliament, we also have to choose what kind of future we want for Europe and for ourselves.
The European Union may seem distant and far away from our everyday life. How-ever, it is a big misconcep-tion. Indeed, the European Union is a major part of al-most all the legislation we live with every day. Some say that an estimated 80% of all new laws in Denmark have their origin in the broad European collaboration that we call the European Union.
Examples of this legislation’s influence on our everyday life are presented in the reg-ulation of chemicals in cos-metics, safety standards in the food we eat, or exemp-tion from customs duty when buying products on the in-ternet from other Europe-an countries in the Europe-an Union’s internal market.
It is about time that we start discussing what we want to do with the European Union, rather than discussing wheth-er to support the European in-stitutions or if there are alter-natives to the current system.
For example, should the EU prioritise the creation of more jobs, fighting of global environ-mental issues, improvement of citizens’ social rights, or all of them at the same time?
In the Danish European Move-ment, we aim to cultivate the constructive and beneficial
EU-debate by providing the platform from which the future of Europe can be discussed.
The question of ‘yes’ or ‘no’ to the European Union is dam-aging to the constructive de-bate of what kind of Europe we want to see in the future. What is needed, on the oth-er hand, is an increased level of information that will lead to more involvement in the Eu-ropean democratic system.
As we see it, the European Union is the tool and the in-strument that we as Europe-an citizens can use to create
the type of future Europe we want for ourselves and for our kids. This is indeed the deci-sion we stand before when electing our Danish repre-sentatives for the European Parliament on May 25th 2014.
The Unified Patent Court – Why?
Do you want to help create jobs and increase growth by sup-porting small innovative com-panies all across Europe? It’s simple; say “Yes” to the Uni-fied Patent Court on May 25th. To be honest, the question given in the referendum on the
27
Unified Patent Court is in fact very technical and complex. Not a topic that you would expect a common citizen to have an opinion about.
So let’s put it simple: As it is now, companies want-ing to export their products across borders in Europe will have to apply for a separate patent in each country they want to be present in. This is a lot of bureaucracy! With The Unified Patent Court, companies can apply for one single patent that will be valid in all the 25 countries in the patent collaboration. All the national patents still persist, so companies can still choose just to apply for one or two national pat-ents – The Unified Patent Court is simply a supple-ment to make cross bor-der trade in Europe easier.
This basically means that it becomes easier and cheaper to both apply for, and protect, these pat-ents all across Europe.
Who will benefit from this?Patent applications always cost the same, no matter if you a small or big company. For bigger companies, these costs don’t really matter. For small innovative companies on the other hand, these application costs can take up a significant part of the budget – not to mention the resources needed for de-fending the different patents in large number of countries. To put it short; the winners are the small and middle
sized companies with limited resources. But this all sounds good, why the referendum then? The reason for the referen-dum is a classic example of how politicians can always agree on not to agree. But 15% of Denmark’s GDP is generated from companies with patent-protected prod-ucts – 10% of all jobs in Den-mark are in these companies.
So if you want to create jobs and increase growth by sup-porting small innovative com-panies all across Europe, help people understand why a “Yes” to the Unified Pat-ent Court on May 25th is important.
By: Anne E. Jensen, president of the Danish European Movement and Member of the European Parliament.
28
The Electing Europe Magazine is published by European Studies at Aarhus University. This magazine is part of the Electing Europe Initiative, which is financially supported by Europa-Nævnet. An ini-tiative with the overall purpose to promote the European Parliament elections 2014 amongst the students at Aarhus University.
The content of the magazine is a mix of academic articles providing the reader with an insight into several relevant themes and debates concerning the elections.
The editorial team thanks all constributing students and organisations for their articles and adds.
The electing Europe initiative is financially supported by: