Introduced in 2014, the process amounts to little more than putting democratic lipstick on a pig. The candidates are put forward by their own European Parliament political groups, with hardly any open consultation. The choice ultimately depends more on backroom negotiations between political groups and a handful of key member countries.
There is nothing fundamentally wrong with this if you believe national leaders are best placed to decide who should lead the Commission. It is also reassuring for national governments who feel they still keep a controlling hand on the EU institutions. But the process also opens Brussels up to heavy criticism at a time when Euroskepticism is rampant. [...]
European elections suffer from a chronic lack of participation, with turnout falling from 62 percent in 1979 to 42.54 percent in 2014. Some have put forward proposals to reform the vote. But Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker’s idea for a directly elected president of the European Council is unlikely to see the light of day anytime soon. And French President Emmanuel Macron’s call for a transnational list is too symbolic — as it would represent only 20 to 30 seats — to fundamentally change European politics.
Holding primaries within each political group ahead of the European election would be a game-changer. It would encourage each political family to engage with their voter base early on and allow them to be more open about how they choose their leaders. Parties willing to take the risk of holding primaries would significantly raise their profile across Europe; those too afraid would be seen as retrograde.
No comments:
Post a Comment