The Juncker Programme

Yesterday the European Parliament elected the EPP Spitzenkandidat to the office of Commission President, putting the seal on the shift in power between the European Council and the Parliament. In his speech before his election, Juncker set out his political guidelines for the next Commission. Titled A New Start for Europe: My Agenda for Jobs, Growth, Fairness and Democratic Change (PDF), it's a pitch for the support of his social democrat allies while sending some signals to the right on subsidiarity and "welfare tourism". The coalition pact worked - not that it was ever in any doubt - delivering 422 votes where 376 would do, giving Juncker a majority of 46.

Juncker's "New Start" gives us a new political benchmark for judging the Commission - having set the goals such as coming up with a Jobs, Growth and Investment Package within the first 3 months of his Commission, the Commission President can now be judged by his own platform. This should breathe new life into the Commission, which under Barroso has largely been reactive to the ideas of the European Council. It also makes Parliament's scrutiny of the Commission more meaningful since the political programme is based on Juncker's majority - parliamentary attacks on legislation and the Commission itself for not delivering will be a lot more meaningful where the Commission isn't simply acting as the middle man for the European Council.

So what's in this New Start?

On the economy, Juncker has stressed the need to cut debt and to stick to the Stability Pact, while looking for more investment from the European Investment Bank. It remains to be seen how much the "Jobs, Growth and Investment Package" can actually deliver, but the PES should be happy that Juncker will continue backing for the Youth Guarantee, a big campaign for them over the last 2 years. Juncker has also pledged action on the digital single market within 6 months of his mandate: on data protection negotiations, reforming telecom rules and copyright rules and simplifying the rules for online consumers. Copyright is a particularly contentious issue after SOPA in the US and ACTA in the EU, so this could be an area to watch in the future.

On industrial policy, Juncker's headline goal is for industry to make up 20% of the European economy by 2020 (up from under 16%), though there is little here by way of concrete proposals yet, and it sounds like the measures envisaged are very indirect. Juncker has put forward the idea of a Capital Markets Union to complement the Banking Union and help cut the costs for raising money on the capital markets for SMEs. When it comes to the Eurozone and future "bail-outs", it's out with the trioka and in with "social impact assessments" to complement the "fiscal sustainability assessment" - a big issue for the PES.

The trade pact with the US was a big issue in the debates, and Juncker is still a big backer of it, though he has spoken about protecting European standards. Potentially the biggest change here could be the increasing parliamentary involvement in trade negotiations if Juncker lives up to his promise of more transparency on the negotiations.

On home affairs, there will be a Commissioner for Fundamental Rights, and Juncker is calling for a Directive to combat Discrimination. There will also be a Commissioner for Migration. The "Blue Card" legislation on immigration into Europe will be reviewed, and the new Commission will look into the support the European Asylum Support Office can offer Member States and third countries. Finally Juncker showed strong support for increasing the budget of the border agency FRONTEX. Perhaps linked to concerns over migration, Juncker has said that there won't be further enlargement of the Union for another 5 years - though it's unlikely that there would be much chance of a candidate country joining in the next 5 years in any case.

Politically the rhetoric has shifted leftwards, but I think the programme is still fairly centre-right. Gone are the earlier musings on a band of European minimum wages, though Juncker supports each Member States having a minimum wage, and it is hard to see how the talk on investment will really be translated into tangible action (there is a history of European politicians pinning their hopes on the European Investment Bank to fund their plans in the absence of a sizable EU budget). And while the debt-cutting targets or mechanisms may be softened or bought under more democratic control, the rules will remain in place.

Much of the programme is still a wish-list and we still have to wait to see what the Commission actually proposes (remember, the Parliament still has to grill and vote in the next Commission over the coming months before they can get down to work), but it represents a big departure from the old State of the European Union speeches that Barroso gave. Barroso's speeches where a fairly reliable guide to the legislative proposals the Commission would make, but where usually originally a Council idea or only put forward where the Commission felt that the Council would find a proposal acceptable. This programme, and probably future Juncker speeches, will probably be more significant for not merely being a list of legislation, but part of a political programme: some legislation won't make it, but it's also an opportunity to shape the EU agenda.

This is not to say that the programme, along with yesterday's speech, is earth-shattering or even if it's the right list of policies, but the political Commission is back. And that's a good thing.

Is the European Left riding high?

Coming second in the European elections was a very bad result for the centre-left across Europe: after years of austerity and the Eurocrisis, and the PES spurring the Spitzenkadidaten process, the S&D group in the Parliament are still 30 seats behind the EPP. However the need for a Grand Coalition to propel Juncker into office has provided an opening for the left, and, like the Grand Coalition in Germany, the essential status quo stance of the biggest party gives the junior partner greater scope for pushing its agenda.

This seems to be the case when it comes to important EU posts. With Juncker as Commission President, there is a domestic German deal to support Martin Schulz as Parliament president for another 2.5 years (with the EPP taking the post for the remaining half of the parliamentary term). Two of the front runners for President of the European Council and the High Representative are Helle Thorning-Schmidt (Danish PM) and Federica Mogherini (Italian Foreign Minister) - to the extent that the EPP are protesting that the PES can't have 3 of the top EU posts. Really, the PES would be wise to go for an economic post over the High Representative position: the presidency of the European Council will be important for negotiations over how the Eurozone will be run, while the PES hasn't a very strong position on European foreign policy (if one of Italy's priorities is immigration, then the Home Affairs Commissioner might be a better position to angle for).

Given the complexity of the EU system, any agreement on policy between the Member States would be hard to stick to, so it's important for the left to win offices that are relevant to their policy goals on the economy. This will be hard to do since it depends on the nominations from the Member States, the negotiations over posts, Juncker's own plans and how the candidates fair in the European Parliament vetting process. There's already plans to revisit the Eurozone budget rules and a deal to soften deficit reduction in return for reforms, so with Italy in the Council driving seat for the rest of the year it appears that the centre-left might have a window of opportunity to push for change.

In the end, however, the lack of agreement over the policy aims of the ECB or even on some form of Transfer Union will mean that the actual scope of opportunity is very narrow indeed. And the broader problems of the centre-left are deep: the fracturing of the old electoral coalition as the economy has become less industrialised, coupled with the decline of two-party politics in most Member States, has left centre-left parties in a difficult position. Uncertain about their domestic support and (to date) largely ineffectual in generating a public debate over a more socially minded Eurozone with greater fiscal firepower, any success over the next few month is in danger of being momentary.

The left in Europe still has a tough task to rebuild itself and shouldn't be seduced into believing that they're in a good position. Europe's centre-right may be more open to some centre-left ideas than you might think at first glance, and they could be well placed to continue capturing centrist and some soft centre-left votes. The centre-left needs to rediscover its voice and identity combined with a platform of reform if it wants to return a a vote - and power - winning force.

The European Council votes: Cameron's Last Stand

The European Council will vote today on the nominee for Commission President. One month of political wrangling on from the elections, it's now certain that Jean-Claude Junker, EPP candidate, will get the nomination because of his majority in the European Parliament. Despite this, Cameron wants an official vote in the European Council rather than concede to consensus in return for some concessions.

What does Cameron get out of this? It may be a principled stand, and it also plays well to the domestic audience to not be seen giving any concessions or backing down (particularly with his backbenchers in the UK Parliament) - indeed Cameron has made this such a personal crusade that it's practically impossible for him to back down now. However, it's not likely to help Cameron's position on Europe for long: just as the 2011 veto failed to change anything and did little to help boost the Conservatives against UKIP, and being outvoted around the Council table is unlikely to inspire confidence in the plan for renegotiation.

The sight of the Swedish and Dutch governments ditching the anti-Juncker alliance also undermines the idea of some type of Northern European Alliance that the UK can be a part of, and even if it did stick together, whether it would be strong enough to push successfully for change. That's not to say that the UK couldn't build such an alliance, or that those countries don't really support (some) of the UK's aims, but the way the UK conducts its diplomacy means that the current "alliance" is really only skin-deep. At the moment Britain seems to identify countries that have a few of the same grumbles and tries to band together just on that issue - but since the EU is basically a series of endless negotiations, in an alliance you need to have strong links over several issues (otherwise allies are less likely to stick their necks out for each other). Without greater coherence and a longer-term attention, the UK becomes less useful to its allies, leading to a weaker alliance. Cameron's blundering anti-Juncker campaign has probably soured some relations and made it more difficult to get allies.

The vote might have another legacy by cracking the history of decisions by consensus. How will this filter into the decisions over other posts? In the short term we'll see a return to consensus as governments fear being isolated by a damaging vote, but the threat of a vote will increasingly hang over the Council table, where even a big country can be outvoted. There may not be more voting, but the European Council may become more majoritarian in character.

After Juncker is nominated and elected Commission President, it will be interesting to see how he will react to Britain's goals (and what job the UK's Commissioner will get!). Cameron has definitely burned all bridges there, but Juncker will still have to react to the increased Euroskeptic representation in the Parliament and the persistent left-wing discontent on the Eurozone. Getting into office is probably the easy part.

State of the political groups

The various national political parties in the European Parliament have had until today to form political groups: by allying with parties from at least 7 other Member States with a minimum of 25 MEPs between them, they are entitled to EU funding and are in a better position to get good seats on parliamentary committees. For the mainstream groups of the Socialists and Democrats, the European People's Party, the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats and the European Greens-European Free Alliance, there has been little change, with most of the movement on the right of the political spectrum.

Current group positions:

EPP: 221
S&D: 191
ECR: 68
ALDE: 67
UEL: 52
Greens: 50
EFD: 48
Non-Attached: 43
[The EP still lists 11 as "others", so they might join a political group yet and possibly change the rankings again].

The Europe of Freedom and Democracy has managed to reform. The grouping that Nigel Farage led in the last Parliament looked like it might be squeezed between the European Conservatives and Reformists and the new far-right alliance of Le Pen and Geert Wilders, but in the end enough MEPs from different countries were found. The biggest gain for the EFD was the membership of the Five Star Movement, which had been considering joining the Greens. The EFD has grown from 32 to 48 MEPs despite the change in membership (the Danish People's Party has left for the ECR) and the reduction in total EP seats, and it remains the smallest group.

The European Conservatives and Reformists have been the biggest winners from this group reshuffle. From being the fifth group in size, behind the Greens, in the last Parliament, the ECR is set to edge out the Liberals as the third biggest group (growing from 54 to 68 MEPs). This should be a big boost to its political weight in the EP, but it's unlikely that it will win the EP Presidency given the likely EPP-PES deal to take turns over the post. The ECR attracted the Eurozone-skeptic AfD and the Danish People's Party, along with a smattering of other individual MEPs. It's possible that this intake could shift the ECR in a more national-conservative direction, so while the group may be founded on a free market platform, this could start to take a back seat to concerns over free movement of people and cultural issues. This might depend on how far the AfD takes a socially conservative direction and whether it can retain a free market outlook. It will be interesting to see if the ECR will "detoxify" the Danish People's Party, or if they will toxify the ECR...

The United European Left grouping has also boosted its numbers from 35 to 52, with the Spanish party Podemos. EUObserver reports that the group is split between those that are anti-EU and those who favour more integration to solve economic and social issues (it seems that Podemos leans towards federalism). Meanwhile the Le Pen-Wilders project for a far-right alliance has failed to bring together enough MEPs from across the EU to form a political group. For now the Front National and the PVV will sit as Non-Attached.

For the EPP and S&D, little has changed. The German delegation is the largest now in the EPP and the S&D's biggest delegation will be Italian, but apart from that there doesn't seem to be any major changes. Likewise ALDE and the Greens have not had any major additions or losses in the re-shuffle - which could be seen as both groups having settled identities (any liberal/Green party that could join probably is already aligned with them).

Over this splintered Parliament it looks like Martin Schulz will re-take the President's chair as part of the coalition between the EPP and S&D. It remains to be seen if the Grand Coalition will stick together on the big issues or if it will only stay in place as a deal over the top posts.

Assessing some of the arguments against the Spitzenkandidaten

While Cameron's campaign against Juncker may be a blunder (though some national leaders may just enjoy messing about in boats), what about the arguments being made against the European Parliament essentially deciding who will be the next Commission President? This may be an institutional power struggle, but it's one being played out in the media for all the public to see (to an extent - none of us has been a fly on the, er, boat of the politiking of some of the national leaders), and the public perception matters. It was the German press that forced Merkel to publicly back Juncker, and now Cameron has written an article for publication in several Member States denouncing the process as a power-grab by the European Parliament.

So let's take a look at the arguments against the Spitzenkandidaten.

Nobody knows who he is!

Who's ever heard of Juncker? Sure, there were some head-to-head debates between Juncker and Schulz on German TV, and there was a pan-European debate between the five candidates, but very few people paid attention to that. (The European Council, by contrast, would never pick someone the public had never heard of). This attacks the democratic legitimacy of the choice. The presidential campaign didn't go as well as its supporters wanted, but it should be noted that the lack of media coverage of the candidates was the most severe in the UK (Juncker didn't campaign there like he did in other countries, and Schulz only visited Northern Ireland because the SDLP, rather than the Labour Party, is the PES party for the area).

The support for Juncker in the German media is because of the debate they had before the elections, so Juncker is seen as the legitimate winner of the elections. Likewise the "nobody knows who he is!" argument is strongest in the British media. While this argument does matter, the problem is that it cuts both ways: how will it play in Germany if the Council picked a nobody rather than Juncker, and how will it play in the UK if Juncker is picked?

The European Parliament doesn't have the right to pick the President, only the European Council does!

The European Council nominates the next Commission President, who is then put to a vote by the European Parliament, which elects the president (later on the Parliament also votes on the Commission as a whole). This argument focuses on the legal position and powers of the institutions, though it can be read both ways - yes, the European Council makes the nomination taking into account the election results (which aren't binding), but the Parliament also "elects" the Commission and Commission President. Those making the argument that the European Council should be free to ignore the election results (or at least the Spitzenkandidaten) argue that the Parliament is making a power-grab here.

Well, the Parliament is making a power-grab. But it's not an illegal one. Through its power of election (and it's power to remove a sitting Commission), the European Parliament has an effective veto over the Commission. The European Council is, of course, free to nominate someone else, but the question being fought over right now is how much it can under the current system. The point is that the Parliament can reject any nominee that the European Council proposes, and this, along with the commitment of the big Europarties to rejecting non-Spitzenkandidaten, that is forcing the Council to deal with this issue in the first place.

There are two legal rules here, but it's the political coalitions that can be built across the Parliament and Council that will decide the issue in the end.

This would make the Commission political! The Commission should be the neutral "civil service" of the EU.

It's hard to see how you can argue that the Commission is politically neutral when the Member States have been sending politicians as Commissioners since the institution began. Jacques Delors was hardly a politically neutral figure. As the Commission has a near-monopoly on the right to propose new laws (some laws can be proposed in the Council), it can't help but be political. While the European Council sets the general direction of the EU, the Commission consults on and draws up the proposals, which have to be put to a vote of the Commissioners before they're proposed. And presumably those who oppose Juncker on the basis that he doesn't fit their political agenda think that the institution is political enough that it warrants a campaign.

The introduction of the Spitzenkandidaten will make the Commission more political, in that the Parliament - or at least the Europarties in the coalition - is likely to want to see a kind of "coalition programme", at least on the priorities of the Commission. I think we'll see something like this from the Grand Coalition in the Parliament, but I doubt it will be very detailed or will end up replacing the Council's script. The Council is still a very powerful co-legislator, and the Commission and Parliament will have to agree on them for any law to be passed.

This would make the Commission too dependent on the Parliament and destroy the institutional balance of the EU.

The Commission, Parliament and Council work together as a kind of institutional triangle: they have to work together to pass any EU laws. An argument against the Parliament having such influence over the choice for Commission President is that the Commission will become overly dependent on the Parliament for its political support and direction. As I mentioned above, the Council's support is needed in any case to pass laws, so I don't think this will have too much of an impact institutionally, but it could have the effect of making the EU a bit more majoritarian.

If there is a coalition programme, for example, the Commission might be motivated to propose a law based on the fact that has a majority in the Parliament. The Council could reject this, of course, but the public nature of the proposal makes the situation more complicated, since Member States might have to think more about their position on the proposal. Consultations with the Parliament and the Council before draft laws are proposed so I can't see anything radical being proposed - but proposals might be increasingly pitched on the understanding that there's a qualified majority in the Council rather than letting some ideas die off or never even be considered due to the opposition of one or two Member States.

An interesting argument could be had here on whether this would make national governments feel less in control of, and less likely to support, the EU while not generating enough democratic legitimacy for the Union to sustain itself without the full support of the elite of the 28 member governments. It's not really something that can be answered before it's been tried, but those supporting the move towards Spitzenkandidaten should be mindful that it's not a strategy without risk.

On the other hand, sticking with the current Council-dominated approach, which tends to favour bigger countries over the small ones, isn't without risk either. The economic crisis has largely been dealt with by the European Council through summits where clearly not all Member States are equal (you only need to think of Germany's dominance in the Eurocrisis). If bringing the Commission into line with the European elections makes the Commission more independent of the Member States and more able to treat them equally, this could be a reason to support the process.

Presidential Race: Juncker's Battle for the Berlaymont

The EPP may have won a plurality of seats in the European Parliament, but Jean-Claude Juncker, its candidate for Commission President, hasn't got the job yet. His Social Democrat rival, Martin Schulz, was reluctant to concede (and has not actually completely given up yet), but the numbers in the Parliament mean that Juncker is far more likely to form a stable majority. That's not the end of the story - several Prime Ministers and national delegations oppose his candidacy, so now there could be a stand-off between the European Parliament and the European Council.


Supporters and Opponents

The PES has recognised Juncker's right to the first attempt at finding a parliamentary majority. The seat numbers have changed a little since my first thoughts on the results on Monday, but essentially a Grand Coalition between EPP and PES (around 405 seats) would provide the most stable coalition with a workable majority. However, some national delegations of the EPP, such as Orban's Fidesz, are against Juncker's candidacy, and since the vote on a Presidential nominee is by secret ballot, it's not clear how cohesive a coalition would be in practice. It may be that the Liberals and Greens need to be added to the coalition to ensure there's a majority that can endure a prolonged struggle with the European Council.

David Cameron quickly came out against Juncker. Though Juncker is a centre-right candidate, Cameron calculates that he is too federalist to have in the Commission during his planned renegotiation. It's not clear who Cameron would find acceptable in the job. Two of the other possibilities that are subject to speculation are Christine Lagarde and Pascal Lamy, though I can't see them being arch-supporters of a repatriation programme. Juncker's supposed federalism may be overstated a bit: he's definitely for the status quo insofar as he backs the current treaties and had a hand in how the Eurozone has been reformed so far, but I think he's more of an intergovernmental pro-European - he's very close to the European Council, having sat in it for many years.

Without an alternative, it's questionable whether Cameron's opposition will actually pay off meaningfully for him. On Newsnight it was said that the UK's ability to block Juncker would be a test of Cameron's influence and ability to renegotiate, but at the moment the reward side of this risk is vague at best. (Remember, the European Council makes it nomination by Qualified Majority). Angela Merkel appears to have cooled on Juncker's candidacy (not that she was ever a fan of giving the Parliament the decision over the job - despite the CDU's manifesto pledge that the Commission President become a directly elected post). To act against your party's successful candidate is an odd political decision, especially given the head-to-head debates between Schulz and Juncker on German TV.


Juncker should get the job

The European Parliament has to stand behind Juncker if it wants the elections to be as important as they claimed during the campaign. Agreeing a compromise candidate with the European Council would discredit the Parliament and make the next elections more difficult. After all, the EPP won the most seats, not the Euroskeptics, and for the winning party's candidate to be dumped by the Council now would send a signal for next time to the voters: there's no point paying any attention to the candidates - or even the election - we'll just strike a deal afterwards.

Far from a Juncker Presidency playing into Euroskeptics' hands or ignoring the voters, it would underline the importance of the vote and respect the outcome and the resulting parliamentary arithmetic. Which is why the commentary on the Tagesschau today rightly pointed out that placating Cameron by ignoring the voters is a stupid political decision.

Questions posed by the Euroskeptic tide

The gains for the Euroskeptic parties across the EU poses a few questions for how European politics will develop. There seems to be consensus that the far-right and far-left parties won't have sufficient numbers to block the workings of the Parliament, though it's unclear yet if another far-right grouping forms out of the new NI intake beside the EFD. Having a political group attracts resources and money, as well as winning the group committee seats which would allow the new Euroskeptics to make a bigger impact.

A Grand Coalition between the EPP and PES (with ALDE and the Greens, and occasionally ECR on some issues) will probably be the order of the day. While the presidential race gained some attention in some Member States, it's fair to say that the protest vote is what helped arrest the decline in turnout. But while the Euroskeptic vote needs to be taken seriously, the response must be balanced against the fact that the vast majority of voters voted for pro-Union parties - though with varying levels of enthusiasm.

Politically within the Parliament the most interesting impact may be on the EPP and ECR. Will the EPP start couching its position in terms of Member States' rights (Juncker, though extremely pro-European, has come across as a Intergovernmental type of pro-European, pointing to the legitimacy of the Council on plenty of occasions)? Will the ECR attract some EPP members such as Orban's Fidesz party, which is often at odds with Brussels and has stated that it will not back Juncker?

But the Member States are where the influence of he election result will be most keenly felt.


Member States & Euroskepticism - Will the Member States reverse integration?:

The impact of Euroskepticism will be felt differently across the EU. The success of the far-left UEL parties in some countries, such as Greece and to a lesser extent in Ireland, indicates that treaty change will be harder to push through, but it is a different sort of skepticism to that of the right - from socialism in one country to a stronger (and ironically more integrated) Social Europe. In France, Denmark, Austria and the UK, the anti-EU and anti-immigration vote is closer to what springs to mind when it comes to right-wing Euroskepticism.

I don't think that there will be a move towards turning back the clock on the Eurozone or the Schengen free border area, but tougher rules on access to welfare and public services for those who do exercise their free movement rights could be brought in nationally and perhaps at the European level. It's unlikely that the EU will soften its approach to asylum and immigration. Politicians who want more fiscal union to fill in the gaps of the Eurozone will have much less room to maneuver - expect a lot of policy drift.

The lessons on the rise of the Euroskeptics for national parties may be to accommodate tougher EU and immigration positions in some countries, but the lessons won't be the same everywhere. Classical right-wing Euroskepticism seems to have done well in older, richer Member States, but not everywhere. In The Netherlands, Wilders' PVV lost votes (while the pro-European D66 topped the poll). The CSU, Merkel's Bavarian sister party, was punished for its anti-European stance - but on the other hand, the economically right-wing and Eurozone-skeptic AfD polled well in some of the Laender were elections will soon take place.

For the crisis-hit countries, Eurobonds and pooling debt could be attractive, with a lot of anger aimed at the Eurozone system as it currently stands not necessarily leading to ruling out all integration if it helps them economically. And in Italy the Democratic Party (PES) convincingly beat the protest Five Star Movement with around 40% of the polls, almost double the Five Star Movement's vote - this is a mainstream party, in government but with a reformist agenda, winning big.

So how will this all work out in the Council? Yes, there needs to be a response, but many parties and countries will differ on what the right course of action would be - there are a few lessons that could be learned depending on where you stand, and that's only looking at a part of the electorate.

European Elections 2014: First Thoughts

The votes are not in yet, but is seems that the exit polls are giving us a fair idea of what the next European Parliament will look like:

EPP: 212
S&D Group (PES): 185
ALDE: 71
Greens: 55
ECR Group: 40
UEL: 45
EFD: 36
Others (New parties not yet part of a group): 67

The biggest gain for the far right were in France (Front national), Denmark (the Danish People's Party), and Hungary (Jobbik). The fact that the Front national, the Danish People's Party and UKIP topped the polls nationally shows a bug leap forward for Euroskepticism. (Denmark appears to have voted in favour of a European Patent Court in a referendum yesterday, however). This isn't so much a problem for the workings of the European Parliament - after all the vast majority of people voted for pro-European, or at least pro-status quo, parties - but it will put pressure on some groups, particularly the EPP, to take a more Euroskeptic or "Eurorealist" approach.

With the bloc of "others/NI" it will be interesting to see how the groups on the right deal with the new entrants: will the ECR and/or the EFD attract these new entrants. UKIP (EFD) has ruled out working with the Front national, but the Front national has ruled out working with Jobbik or Golden Dawn, so it's still not clear how this new "NI" bloc will work in practice.

On the Presidential race, it looks like the EPP has won and Juncker will have the first opportunity to form a majority in Parliament. The language has changed slightly here, in a predictable way, from a straight presidential race to a more prime ministerial one: the biggest party has the first chance to form a majority, and then the next one, and so on. The difference here is that the candidates probably need an outright win plus a majority to convince the European Council to give way to the European Parliament on the issue of who leads the Commission - something that the EUCO isn't happy to let go of.

Schulz hasn't given up on his hopes of getting the job, though it's become far less likely in practice. The election of a Commission President requires an absolute majority of the Parliament, which is 376. EPP + ECR + ALDE = 323; S&D + ALDE + Greens = 311; and S&D + EPP = 397. While these numbers aren't final, it's clear that a left or right-wing bloc would struggle to command a majority in the Parliament (and that's before you take into account that some MEPs might not vote along the party line since they vote by secret ballot).

There is speculation that there will be a compromise candidate from outside the Europarty candidates - such as Christine Lagarde or Pascal Lamy. The European Parliament should avoid falling into this trap and agree on voting for one of the candidates that ran. Based on these numbers, I don't think it's possible for Schulz to take the post, but perhaps Juncker could be made Commission President and the PES can control some key DGs of the Commission. This would be more in line with the parliamentary nature of the system, but the European Council will strongly resist parliamentary influence over the Commission.

In the coming days and weeks the announcements and spin from the Juncker camp and the various heads of government will reveal the direction of travel here: how much does Juncker really want the job, and if he's bought off with the Presidency of the European Council, would Schulz be able to insert himself into the Commission (unlikely)? Will the Council try to force a compromise candidate on the Parliament? Finally, the politicking of the Europarties will matter a lot: if they don't find a way to hang together as a majority coalition (while maximising their various interests), then the European Parliament will lose its battle to make the Commission more democratically accountable to it, and it will make it extremely difficult to build on the idea that the EP elections can be the equivalent of a government-changing election at the European level.

MEPs should try to remember in the coming months that their own influence and relevance will be dependent on how they fight their next political battle.

European Elections 2014: Super Sunday Vote Part III

We're on our final stretch of our tour round the voting Member States today.

Sweden:

Sweden is currently governed from the centre-right, with the Moderate Party leading the government. With national elections coming up in September, there have been worries that the far-right (Swedish Democrats) and far-left (Left Party) stand to gain votes and seats, and the European elections is being seen as a dry-run for the national elections.

Current Polls:

Social Democratic Worker's Party (PES): 30%
Centre Party (ALDE): 4%
Liberal Party (ALDE): 9%
Environment Party (Greens): 12%
Swedish Democrats (NI): 7%
Christian Democrats (EPP): 4%
Left Party (UEL): 7%
Moderate Party (EPP): 20%


Slovenia:

Slovenia is a Eurozone country that has fallen into economic difficulties and there have been concerns that it may need to be bailed out - it has had to recapitalise its banks with €3 billion. The centre-right parties look like they are set to win the election in a landslide, so Slovenia can be counted as being firmly in the EPP bracket of parliamentary arithmetic.

Current Polls:

Democratic Party (EPP): 27%
Social Democrats (PES): 9%
Christian People's Party (EPP): 21%
Positive Slovenia (ALDE): 5.5%
Liberal Democrats (ALDE): 7%
Democratic Party of Pensioners (NI): 4.6%
Slovenian National Party (NI): 4%
List Verjamem (NI): 12%
United Left (UEL): 4%


Cyprus:

Cyprus is one of the latest countries to be hit by the Eurocrisis, and the first country to have a "bail-in", with depositors hit by the losses of the banks. The Democratic Rally (EPP) won the presidential elections in February 2013 (the post was previously held by the communist Progressive Party of Working People [AKEL]), and they are currently leading in the polls by a wide margin.

Current Polls:

Democratic Rally (EPP): 38%
AKEL (UEL): 24%
Democratic Party (PES): 12%
Citizen's Alliance Party (NI): 7%
Movement for Social Democracy (PES): 9%


Lithuania:

The Social Democratic Party has led the government since the general election in 2012, and the Lithuanian government ran the Council presidency in the second half of 2013. Lithuania's most recognisable politician is probably its independent president, Dalia Grybauskaité, who has been dubbed the Iron Lady. The Social Democrats are on course for a convincing win judging by the polls on PollWatch 2014.

Current Polls:

Social Democratic Party (PES): 38%
Homeland Party (EPP): 10%
Labour Party (ALDE): 11%
Liberal Movement (ALDE): 9%
Order and Justice (EFD): 14%
Electoral Action of Poles in Lithuania (AECR): 5%
Peasants and Greens (NI): 5%


Estonia:

Estonia is a small Eurozone country of about 1.3 million, but it has 6 main parties in its parliament. An independent aligned with the Greens is running and is predicted to win a seat. It looks like the Liberal ALDE group will win half the seats in Estonia.

Current Poll:

Centre Party (ALDE): 20%
Reform Party (ALDE): 18%
Res Publica (EPP): 17%
Social Democratic Party (PES): 18%
Indrek Tarand (Independent/Greens): 14%


Finland:

Finland is another stronghold for the Liberals (along with Estonia and the Netherlands). However, the EPP and the far-right True Finns are expected to do well in these elections. The True Finns (or the Finns Party) have increased their profile through the opposition to bail outs within the Eurozone. Finland, along with The Netherlands and Germany, tend to take a hard pro-austerity line as a trade-off for bail-outs.

Current Polls:

National Coalition Party (EPP): 23%
True Finns (EFD): 21%
Centre Party (ALDE): 14%
Social Democratic Party (PES): 13%
Green League (Greens): 11%
Left Alliance (UEL): 8%
Swedish People's Party (ALDE): 4%
Christian Democrats (EPP): 3.5%


Luxembourg:

One of the smallest Member States, but its former Prime Minister Jean-Claude Juncker is heading the EPP campaign as the candidate for the Commission Presidency. Juncker lost the general election in 2013, where the Christian Social People's Party were the biggest party, but the opposition parties won enough seats to form a coalition and oust the government.

Current Polls:

Christian Social People's Party (EPP): 34%
Luxembourg Socialist Worker's Party (PES): 20%
Democratic Party (ALDE): 18%
Greens: 10%
Alternative Democratic Reform Party (NI): 7%
The Left (UEL): 5%

European Elections 2014: Super Sunday Vote Part II

Following on from Part I, lets take a look at some of the other countries vting today.


Spain:

Spain is the biggest of the crisis-hit countries. While not bailed out in the same way as Ireland, Portugal and Greece, its banks still needed access to credit. Spain has now exited the bail out, but its economy is still struggling with 55% youth unemployment and a general level of around 25% unemployment. The Popular Party (EPP) replaced the ruling Socialists (PES) in 2011 advocating austerity as the solution to the crisis. With popular discontent visable through movements like the Indignados, austerity and the economic crisis is clearly a central issue.

Catalonian independence and regional governance is also an issue: Catalonia's parliament voted to hold a referendum on independence, which it doesn't have the power to do, and which the Spanish government refuses to recognise.

According to the polls, it looks like the PP will win the election, with the Socialists coming second.

Current polls:

PP (EPP): 35%
PSOE (PES): 29%
CEU ("Coalition for Europe" - pro-European regionalist parties; NI): 6-8%
United Left (UEL): 10-14%
Union, Progress and Democracy (pro-European, centre-left, Spanish nationalism; NI): 4%
EPDD (social democrats, pro-Catalonian independence; NI): 4%
Citizens (centre-left, anti-Catalonian separatism; NI): about 2%
Vox (Pro-European/economic liberalism; NI): about 2%
Podemos (anti-capitalist; NI): about 2%


Poland:

Poland last had a general election in 2011, when Donald Tusk's Civic Platform (EPP) was re-elected to government. Civic Platform had topped the poll in the last European elections, but this time around the opposition Law and Justice Party is leading in the polls.

Current polls:

Civic Platform (EPP): 29%
Law and Justice (AECR): 30%
Democratic Left Alliance (PES): 12%
Polish People's Party (EPP): 5.6%
Poland Together (AECR): 3.3%
Europa Plus (PES): 5.1%
Congress of the New Right (NI): 8.8%
United Poland (EFD): 3.9%


Portugal:

A bail-out country, Portugal is struggling with austerity. The Social Democratic Party (EPP - despite the name it is a centre-right party) is the main party of government at the moment (the last general election being in 2011), and the left wing parties look likely to take the biggest share of the vote between them.

Current polls:

Social Democratic Party/Alliance Portugal (EPP): 30%
Socialist Party (PES): 36%
Left Bloc (UEL): 5.8%
Democratic Unitarian Coalition (UEL): 11-12%
Earth Party: 3.4%


Croatia:

Croatia is the newest Member State to the European Union, having only joined in 2013, so its also had its European Parliament elections very recently as well, when HDZ (EPP) topped the poll. History looks like it's going to repeat itself, but this time around the Kukuriku Coalition (PES) is likely to perform better and win more seats.

Current Polls:

HDZ (EPP): 30%
Kukuriku Coalition (PES): 25%
Labour Party (UEL): 7%
Croatian Sustainable Development (Intends to join a Greens): 9%
Savez za Hrvatsku (NI): 6%
Nacionalni forum (ALDE): 3%


Bulgaria:

GERB (EPP) is the current governing party in Bulgaria at the moment. Elections were held in 2013 over widespread protests about electricity prices. A number of political and corruption scandals have left politics in Bulgaria very damaged, though it looks like the two main parties or coalitions of parties will gain a majority of the vote between them.

Current polls:

GERB (EPP): 26%
Socialist Party (PES): 30%
Movement for Rights and Freedoms (ALDE): 10%
Attack (NI): 5.5%
Reformist Bloc (EPP): 5%
National Front for the Salvation of Bulgaria (EFD): 3.6%
Alternativa za Bulgarsko Vuzrazhdane (NI): 4.6%
Bulgaria bez Cenzura (NI): 12%
Bulgaria bez Cenzura


Denmark:

The last Danish election, in 2011, swept a left-wing coalition headed by Helle Thorning-Schmidt into power. The popularity of the government has waned, and there is a danger that the far-right People's Party will win the European elections with over a quarter of the vote.

Current Polls:

People's Party (EFD): 27%
Venstre (ALDE): 22%
Social Democrats (PES): 21%
Socialist People's Party (Greens): 7%
The Conservative People's Party (EPP): 5%
Radical Venstre (ALDE): 6%
Liberal Alliance (NI): 3%
People's Movement against the EU (UEL): 9%

European Elections 2014: Super Sunday Vote Part I

Most of the Member States are holding their polls today - about 21 of them. So there's a lot to get through!


Austria:

Austria is currently governed by a grand coalition, with the Social Democratic SPOe (PES) the senior party and the Christian Democratic OeVP (EPP) the junior party. The far-right Freedom Party, FPOe (NI), has been gaining support in state elections as a party of opposition, while the former party of Jorg Haider, the Alliance for the Future of Austria (BZOe) (NI), has tried to take a more liberal turn. Still Euroskeptic, the BZOe now pushes for flat taxes and campaigns against fiscal union in the EU.

The government in Austria has traditionally been a grand coalition (it was believed this would be a better way to govern after the highly divisive politics of the Inter-War period), and this has let the extreme parties grow as main parties of opposition. The Greens have also built up some support as an opposition party on the left.

In terms of MEPs, there have been some interesting moves and defections. Most notably, Angelika Werthmann has joined BZOe and been expelled from ALDE in the European Parliament. Ewald Stadler has set up REKOS, the Reform Conservatives, a Euroskeptic party that will sit with the EFD group in Parliament, and Martin Ehrenhauser has set up Europa Anders (Different Europe), a left-wing group that includes Communists and the Pirate Party. Team Stronach, a party set up by an Austro-Canadian businessman, won't be contesting the European elections.

A new liberal party aligned with ALDE, NEOS, will contest the elections and has been doing well with about 10% in the polls.

Overall it looks like the two main parties will hold their leading position, but the Freedom Party will make a strong showing of about 20%.

Current polls:

SPOe (PES): 25%
OeVP (EPP): 26%
BZOe (NI): 1-2%
FPOe (NI): 20%
Greens: 13%
NEOS (ALDE): 10%
REKOS (EFD): 1%
Europa Anders (NI): 2%


Germany:

Germany had its federal election back in September 2013 which led to a big victory for Angela Merkel's CDU-CSU (EPP) and to a grand coalition government with the Social Democrats (PES). Germany has been one of the more engaged Member States in the European elections, with two head-to-head debates between Juncker and Schulz on national TV (most recently on ARD, the public broadcaster). It will be interesting to see how the new AfD, which is an economically right-wing and anti-Euro party, will do. The liberal FDP was thrown out of the Bundestag in the federal election and now looks to be surpassed by the AfD in the polls.

An important factor this time around is the threshold to win seats in the EP. The Constitutional Court has done away with the 5% vote threshold and also the subsequent 3% threshold, so now it's much easier to win a seat. Germany is a single constituency for the European elections.

This will make the elections interesting - the FDP are hovering around 3%, while the AfD are around 7%. More worryingly is the idea that one of the far-right parties such as the NPD or Die Republikaner might do well. The question of immigration and control has crept into German politics, particularly the CSU, the Bavarian sister-party to Merkel's CDU (which is increasingly taking a stance against the Transfer Union within Germany), and this has been taken up by the AfD too.

Current polls:

CDU/CSU (EPP): 38%
SDP (PES): 27%
FDP (ALDE): 3%
Greens: 10%
Die Linke (UEL): 8%
AfD: 7%


Belgium:

Belgium is divided into linguistic constituencies: French, Dutch and German-speaking, and the federal and linguistic community based nature of the Belgian constitution and political system follows this. There are social democratic, Christian democratic, liberal, Green, etc. parties that are French or Dutch-speaking, leading to a complex party-political system where it famously takes ages to form a government. (The current government, led by Social Democrat Di Rupo, holds the record for the longest formation time).

From the polls it looks like the Flemish separatists could top the poll and an far-right Flemish party, Vlaams Belang, might do well with around 8%.

Current polls (from April):

Flemish Christian Democrats (EPP): 10% (winners of the 2009 election, would be down from 14%)
Parti socialiste (PES): 10%
SP.A (PES): 9%
Vlaams Belang (NI): 8%
Ecolo (Green): 4%
Groen (Green): 5%
Open Vld (ALDE): 12%
Mouvement Reformateur (ALDE): 8%
New Flemish Alliance (European Free Alliance - sits with the Green Group in the EP): 20%
Worker's Party of Belgium: 3%
Christian Social Party (German-speaking): 0.2%


Greece:

The country hardest-hit from austerity and the home country of Presidential candidate Alexis Tsipras (UEL), it looks like the far-left will top the polls here. A big concern will be whether the neo-fascist Golden Dawn (XA) capture a sizable share of the vote. A new party called The River, a pro-European centre to centre-left party, was launched in March and is on about 8%.

Current polls:

Olive Tree Greece (PES): 7%
New Democracy (EPP) (senior governing party): 25%
Communist PArty (UEL): 6%
SYRIZA (UEL - Tsipras' party): 29%
Golden Dawn: 9%
Independent Greeks (conservatives/Euroskeptics): 3-4%
Democratic Left (S&D group in the EP): 2-3%
The River: 8%


Hungary:

The conservative Fidesz party (EPP) dominates Hungarian politics and has been controversially redrawing the country's constitution, bringing it into conflict with the EU, which has had concerns over the freedom of press and the independence of the judiciary. The opposition Socialists (PES) are predicted to come third behind the far-right Jobbik Party. The Greens may also win a seat.


Italy:

Italy's politics have been shaken up by Grillo's Five Star Movement and the constant scandals from former Prime Minister Berlusconi. The senior governing party, the Democratic Party (PES), have recently ousted their previous Prime Minister, Letta, and replaced him with their party leader, the former Florence mayor Matteo Renzi. It looks like the Democratic Party and the Five Star Movement are going to do well, with Berlusconi's Forza Italia (EPP) coming third.

There is a 4% threshold to enter Parliament, with guaranteed representation for the German-speaking minority of South Tyrol.

Current polls:

Forza Italia (EPP): 18%
Democratic Party (PES): 34%
Northern League (EFD): 5%
Five Star Movement (NI): 24%
Alternative Europe - with Tsipras (UEL): 4%
Brothers of Italy (EPP): 3.6%
New Centre Right (EPP): 5.5%


Romania:

I wasn't really able to find out much information on the Romanian poll, but here are the current polls from PollWatch 2014:

Social Democratic Union (PES): 40%
National Liberal Party (ALDE): 15%
Liberal Democratic Party (EPP): 13%
People's Movement Party (EPP): 9.3%
Democratic Union of Hungarians in Romania (EPP): 5.6%
Forta Civica (EPP): 5%
People's Party - Dan Diaconescu (NI): 4%

European Elections 2014: the Saturday Poll

Today Latvia, Slovakia, Malta and the French Overseas Territories start voting in the European elections. The Czech Republic is voting for a second day - you can find out more about their poll here.

France:

Taking the French Overseas Territories as an excuse to write about France now (metropolitan France is voting along with most of the rest of the Member States tomorrow - I might have a heart attack trying to fit all that in!).

France's embattled Socialist President, Hollande, is likely to be a factor in dragging down the PES vote, but from the opinion polls (in comparison to the 2009 vote), it looks like the Greens and the centre-right UMP (EPP) are the parties set to lose the most votes. The rise of the Front national has been the main concern - it's led consistently in the polls (at around 23%!). Sarkozy, the former President who seems to be angling for a comeback, has called for a huge repatriation of powers from Brussels and has argued against the borderless Schengen system.

While the prospect of a tripling of the FN vote is frightening, the votes of the other parties look remarkably stable in the polls. The Parti socialiste is sitting at around 16%, the same as last time, and the Front de gauche (UEL) and MoDem (ALDE) appear to have increased their support slightly, to 7.5% and 10% respectively. The Greens have dropped from 16% to 10% and the UMP have gone down from 27% to 21%. Does this mean that as well as traditional right-wing votes, the Green's anti-globalisation strain could be switching to FN?


Latvia:

Latvia has been through a lot in recent years. Though not in the Euro, the country has implemented harsh austerity and has just joined the Euro at the start of the year. Recently the Prime Minister resigned over the collapse of the roof of a supermarket in Riga, leading to the formation of a national unity government (excluding the Harmony Centre party (PES), which is a party representing Russian-speakers). Politics in Latvia can be volatile, with new parties able to break through and win elections, and with an ethnic divide between Latvian and Russian speakers. The national general election is scheduled for October 2014.

At the moment it looks like Harmony Centre will top the poll, with Unity (EPP) coming second and the Union of Greens and Farmers (NI) coming third. You can read more about the Latvian political situation in this great LSE blog post.


Slovakia:

As a Eurozone member, Slovakia has had concerns over the bail outs - as one of the poorer Eurozone states, it has seemed unfair that Slovakia now has to help bail out some of the richer countries. Slovak politics seems to be dominated by Smer (PES), with numerous other smaller parties - in the 2009 European elections Smer topped the poll winning 5 MEPs, but the EPP won 6 MEPs across 3 member parties in the country. The right wing parties have been hit by corruption scandals in recent years.

In March there was a presidential election where an independent, Andrej Kiska beat Smer candidate and Prime Minister Robert Fico with a vote share of almost 60% in the second round of voting. In the first round of voting the two nearest competitors were also independents. So while Smer as a dominant position in the Slovak political system, there can be strong opposition from independent "outsider" candidates.

Slovakia was one of the countries with a very low turnout in 2009, and it is likely that turnout will remain low today. Smer is on 36% in the polls and is likely to win around 6 seats, with a clutch of EPP-aligned parties picking up a seat each between them.


Malta:

As a small island country, Malta sends the minimum 6 MEPs to the European Parliament (up from 5 seats in the last Parliament). So far the elections have proven to be a two-party race, with the National Party (EPP) and the Labour Party (PES) dividing up the seats between them. In the last European elections the Labour Party won 3 seats to the National Party's 2.

In this election it doesn't look like much will change from the two-party nature of the poll. Interestingly, the Labour Party has got the backing of a hunting lobby group, with the incumbent MEPs pledging themselves to protecting the culture and tradition of hunting.

In the polls, Labour stands at about 54.5%, the National Party at 42.5%, and the Greens have 2%. If this is the result at the ballot box, both the Labour Party and National Party will get 3 seats each.

European elections 2014: Ireland and the Czech Republic

Day two of the polls now, and Ireland and the Czech Republic are voting. The Czech Republic will have its polls open for two days, Friday and Saturday, to give people more opportunity to vote.


Ireland:

The crisis-hit country recently came out of the bail-out programme as the poster-boy for austerity, but despite the resignation to budget cuts the policy hasn't been popular. When the last government fell due to the bail out in 2011, the governing Fianna Fáil party (ALDE) was trashed at the polls. FF is still blamed for the crisis (it was the senior party in government from 1998-2011), but has made a slight recovery in the polls as the Fine Gael-Labour (EPP-PES) government continued the bail-out programme left by FF.

Sinn Féin (UEL) seems to be the biggest beneficiary of the government's unpopularity. Though its leader Gerry Adams was arrested and questioned a few weeks ago in connection with an IRA killing (he was released without charge) and Sinn Féin's connection with the Provisional IRA during the Troubles is still a problem for its image in the Republic of Ireland, the party has a strong front bench that helps promote the party. It is likely to make gains at the expense of the Socialist Party's single MEP, Paul Murphy, in Dublin and at the expense of Labour generally. As the junior, centre-left, party in government, Labour is bearing the brunt of popular discontent with the government and may be lucky to retain 1 out of its 3 current MEPs.

Ireland is one of the few Member States to be divided into constituencies (Dublin, Midlands-North-West, and South) and are run on a Single Transferable Vote system (Northern Ireland also has this system while the rest of the UK has a closed list system). This means that voters can list the candidates in order of preference, so party loyalty or preference can be trumped by a strong personal vote. One candidate, Ming Flanagan, is an independent who has campaigned against the impact of EU rules on turf-cutting, which has been an emotive issue for the countryside. Flanagan is already a sitting TD (MP), and if he's elected his nominated replacement might be the one to actually take the seat.

The Irish political party system is still in flux with FF still far from its once dominant position. Throw in personal votes, the possibility for competition between candidates of the same party, and the redrawing of constituency boundaries (bringing 4 constituencies down to 3), and there'll be an interesting battle or two in each part of the country.

The Irish Times gives a good run-down of the three constituencies and the issues in each one if you want to dig deeper:

Dublin
Midlands-North-West
South


Czech Republic:

The Czech Republic had a general election last year, resulting in a coalition government between the Social Democratic CSSD (PES), the break-out new party of the Action of Dissatisfied Citizens ANO and the Christian and Democratic Union (EPP). ANO's rise was the biggest shock to the system - founded and led by millionaire Andrej Babis, the centre-right party won 47 seats and became the second-biggest party in the parliament and in government. ANO has the strange position of opposing Euro membership for the Czech Republic and greater integration generally, but they are supporting the Liberal candidate and outspoken federalist, Guy Verhofstadt, for the Commission Presidency (Babis has since said that he's open on the question of Euro membership).

The Civic Democrats are running a petition against Euro membership, though ironically it appears that their membership is one of the most supportive of the Czech parties of joining the Euro.

CSSD and ANO don't appear to have been in government long enough for the anti-incumbent effect to take over - both parties are leading the others in the polls. There is a 5% threshold that parties have to pass in order to win seats in the elections.

Current polls:

CSSD (PES): 23%
ANO (ALDE): 25%
Communist Party (Party of the European Left [observer]): 11%
TOP09 (EPP): 8%
Civic Democrats (AECR): 6%
Christian and Democratic Party (EPP): 6%

European Elections 2014: UK and The Netherlands

It's the first day of the polls for the European elections, and the first countries to start voting are the UK and the Netherlands.


United Kingdom:

The election debate in the UK hasn't had much cross-over with the debates in other countries. The debate been the Europarty candidates for Commission President were shown, but only on the BBC Parliament channel so they didn't get wide coverage. The tone of the election is very much a pro- or anti-UKIP one. UKIP has been rising in popularity despite candidates and even the leader, Nigel Farage, getting themselves into hot water and despite the constant attacks of the other parties.

The Liberal Democrats are expected to lose a lot of support as they are now a party of government (they are the junior party in the Conservative-Lib Dem coalition) and are no longer very attractive for the protect vote. Nick Clegg, the Lib Dem leader, has set the party up as the "Party of In", and has taken on Nigel Farage in two debates (which Farage is widely considered to have won). The Conservatives are expecting a hit as the senior government party (they were in opposition during the last election) that's pursuing austerity in power, as well as losing Euroskeptic votes on the right to UKIP.

Labour is expected to win seats as an opposition party, but expectations are muted due to the UKIP surge. The European elections are being portrayed as a protest vote against the established parties before the run up to the 2015 general election, so poorer than expected showings for the main parties probably won't be as damaging as they might have been in past elections. The Greens are confident that they will improve their polling performance this year, but since the polling data tends to lump them in with others, I don't know what the generally predicted numbers are. The far-right British National Party will probably lose the two seats that it controversially won last time around.

Current polls: Sun/YouGov poll [BBC group of polls]:

Conservatives: 23% [31-33%]
Labour: 27% [35-38%]
Liberal Democrats: 10% [8-13%]
UKIP: 27%[13-15%]
Greens: 8% [?]
Other: [7-9%]


The Netherlands:

The Netherlands last had a general election in 2012 when a VVD-PvdA (Liberals [economically right-wing] and the Labour party] grand coalition government was elected. That election had been caused by Geert Wilders' populist PVV withdrawing its support for the government (they supported the minority government in parliament but weren't part of it). In the general election the PVV lost support due to this, but now that they're not connected to the government their support has risen again.

The PVV have made common cause with the Front National in France, forming an anti-EU alliance against the "monster in Brussels".

The Prime Minister, VVD's Mark Rutte, came out just yesterday with the statement that the EU should stick to 5 key areas: the internal market, free trade, cutting red tape, combating labour market abuse and making a single energy market. The move might be intended to win back support from right-wing voters, but announcing it the day before the election is an odd decision and it may not have much of an impact.

The PvdA is in a tough position. It ran against the VVD in the last election and has made compromises as part of the government. In the general election it faced tough competition from the Socialist Party, which was very popular early on in the campaign. Now the Socialist Party is doing well in the polls and looks like it's on course to beat the PvdA.

D66, a left-liberal party is performing strongly in the polls at the moment. D66 has one of the most well-known MEPs, Sophie In't Veld, who has a strong position on privacy issues. In some polls D66 is leading.

The Dutch political party landscape is varied and it made up of a lot of small parties who will be in the running for some seats. It is unlikely that even the party with the biggest percentage of the vote will get more than 6 seats.

Currently the polls stand at (could have changed if there are more recent polls I haven't seen):

VVD (right-wing liberals): 12-16%
PvdA: 9-10%
PVV: 12-18%
D66: 15-19%
SP (Socialist Party): 10-12%
CDA (Christian Democrats - the big winners at the last elections): around 11%
CU-SGP (Christian Union-Reformed Political Party): 8-9.5%
GL (Groen-Links/Green-Left): 5-6%
PvdD (Party for the Animals [animals' rights party]: 1-2%
50PLUS: 3-4%
Others: 2-2.5%

European elections 2014: the Polls open

The European elections start today with polls opening in the UK and the Netherlands. On Friday Ireland and the Czech Republic will vote (the Czech Republic will have polls open for two days to help people vote). Slovakia, Latvia, Malta and the French Overseas Territories vote on Saturday, and the rest of the 28 Member States hold their polls on Sunday.

At the moment the polls are giving a slight lead to the European People's Party over the Party of European Socialists, with the Liberals predicted to win 8-10% of the seats in Parliament, and the Greens and AECR lower on around 5-6%. The United European Left bloc could increase their seats and win around 6-7% if the polls are right, while the anti-EU Europe of Freedom and Democracy group could win 5% of the seats. The European polls are a complicated working out of which groups are likely to win seats and adding them up for a European prediction, so I'm not sure how accurate they will turn out to be.

That the elections tend to be plagued by low turnout means that it could be a case of who can mobilise their support the best - will the Euroskeptics get a big boost in practice? The recent polls seem to indicate that the UEL is benefiting from the political mood more than the EFD - the the biggest increase may be for the Independents who haven't aligned with any political grouping yet.

The elections will decide on the make-up of the Parliament for the next 5 years: will it lean left or right on the economy and austerity; will it be pro- or anti-integrationist; will it go for CAP reform; and will it have strong civil liberties or law and order voice? A lot of the issues people talk about, or have complaints about, are around these issues, so this is your chance to help shape EU politics. A running theme of the election has been how can the EU be brought closer to citizens and made more accountable. Well, while there are a lot of changes that should be made to bring the EU closer to citizens, the fact is that citizens will only be heard if they use their voice. Voting in the election is one way of doing that, so go for the party or candidate that best represents your views - remember, they're going to be there for 5 years...

This election should also decide the next Commission President. We've had debates between the candidates (the latest being between Juncker and Schulz on German TV), and campaign buses crossing the continent. The Parliament should stick to its guns on this and make sure that the candidate of the winning party gets the job: this will make the elections matter more, and make the EU more accountable to citizens.

Another Europe is possible - the Party of the European Left's Manifesto

The Party of the European Left, which sits in the United European Left - Nordic Green Left group in the European Parliament, is a left-wing Europarty that's running Greek opposition leader Alexis Tsipras as its candidate for the Commission Presidency. It's the second smallest party in the Parliament and is further to the left of the PES and the European Greens, but some of its member parties have gained strength nationally, such as SYRIZA in Greece. In its manifesto (PDF), the European Left sets itself up as the anti-austerity party and an opponent of the EU-US Trade Agreement.

As well as being anti-austerity, the European Left opposes privatisation in general and highlights its opposition to the privatisation of natural resources. It wants to regain power over the world of finance, protect the rights of workers and trade unions, and focus the Common Agricultural Policy to ensure food security. The European Left wants the EU to preserve its independence versus the US and NATO, demands the suspension of the Israel-EU Association Agreement for human rights reasons and pushes for the reform of the Union for the Mediterranean (which it accuses of helping destabilise the region) and the renegotiation of free trade agreements with Latin America and the Caribbean (to make them benefit the people more).

On the Eurozone, the European Left wants the abolition of a large part of public debt (freezing its repayment) and the ECB to be reformed so that it becomes the lender of last resort and offer loans directly to over-indebted Member States (which would require treaty change, I think). The European Left would abolish the Fiscal Pact and the "6-pack" of measures that regulate Eurozone budgets. Corporate taxation would be harmonised, and employment would be boosted by investment from the European Investment Bank and the European Left advocate the creation of a "European public bank of social and solidarity-based development" that would fund projects on the basis of social and environmental criteria. The European Left aims towards the public and democratic control of strategic sectors of the economy and towards a 35 hour working week.

In agriculture, the European Left would tax imports and exports that destablise the local market in order to finance the relocalisation of production, stop support for biofuels and regulate the margins and practices of agrifood giants and retailers. The European Left would have a similar relocalisation focus for industry.

The European Left is against the membership of NATO (of the Member States and wants immediate withdrawal from the alliance. They also oppose the militarisation of the EU.

The Party of the European Left is running n a hard-left platform. Not only is it anti-austerity, but its focus on "relocalisation" of agriculture and industry seems to be a policy of de-globalisation and autarky. If you are strongly anti-globalisation and favour turning from international free trade agreements to relocalisation, then the Party of the European Left might be for you.

*Insert Manifesto Here* - the MELD (non)-manifesto

The Europe of Freedom and Democracy Group in the European Parliament houses many of the Euroskeptic parties. Part of the group's charter is that each national delegation can vote as they see fit, so it's not surprising that the connected Europarty, the Movement for a Europe of Liberties and Democracy (MELD*) doesn't have a common election manifesto. Note that while UKIP is a major part of the EFD group, it's not part of MELD, which counts Lega Nord, the True Finns party and the Danish People's Party among its members.

The principles of MELD, which closely mirrors the EFD Charter, are:

• Supporting freedom and cooperation among sovereign States in an effort to impede the complete bureaucratisation of Europe;

• Opposing further European integration;
• Supporting national referendums as the means through which any treaty change takes place;
• That the nation state is the legitimate level for democracy;
• National delegations in the Europarty can vote how they wish.

Incidentally, UKIP do not have a manifesto going into this election.

The lack of a common manifesto, and in some cases any manifesto at all, is unlikely to be a problem for these parties, however. They present a clear anti-EU position, so if you want an anti-EU voice that supports withdrawal or dissolution rather than some form of reform, then MELD and its allies might be for you. It does mean, however, that they're free to vote however they want in the meantime.



*Is it just me, or is that an ironic acronym?

Towards a New Europe - the PES manifesto

The centre-left Party of European Socialists is the next of the big two that's in with a chance of winning the European election. Their manifesto is also on their candidate's, Martin Schulz's, website. You can find the manifesto here (PDF). While the European Parliament has shifting coalitions from issue to issue (there may be a right-wing coalition on the economy one day, a left-wing one on civil liberties, for example), the centre-right EPP has been the biggest party in the Parliament for the last 5 years and has also been dominant in the Council and Commission. So the PES is approaching this election as the opposition, presenting itself as an alternative to the current political direction of the EU - hence the title of the manifesto: "Towards a New Europe".

On the economy, employment is the biggest issue for the PES, which says it has a long-term commitment to full employment. During the last Parliament it campaigned for a Youth Guarantee plan, and it pledges to increase its budget and extend it to everyone under 30. It wants a European industrial policy to support SMEs, and to increase protections for workers posted in other Member States by revising the Posting of Workers Directive. The PES wants decent minimum wages introduced across Europe through legislation or collective bargaining (the mix is probably a concession to the different national traditions - so I wonder how much this would translate into actual legislation or practical policy). As part of its idea of Social Union, the PES wants binding targets on employment, education and social cohesion.

Unsurprisingly, the PES condemns the "austerity-only" policy and wants more investments through national budgets. It's not clear if this simply means pushing for investment programmes to be a part of national budgets or if it should be something more co-ordinated. The PES wants the European Parliament to have a greater say in Eurozone economic and fiscal policy. When it comes to the financial sector, PES, which campaigned for a Financial Transaction Tax, says it will push for earlier implementation, bring in further regulations and create an independent and public European Credit Rating agency.

The PES reiterates its support for non-discrimination, integration and participation policies for immigration and asylum, and striking the right balance between privacy, security and freedom. However, there is little in the form of policy proposals here.

On the environment, the PES support further binding emissions targets and the use of Project Bonds to finance investments in renewable energy and technology. The PES wants to guarantee minimum access to energy for everyone in order to fight energy poverty.

The strongest themes of the PES manifestos are clearly in the areas of the economy and social justice, with some ideas on green policies. Justice and home affairs is its weakest point when it comes to proposals. If you want a more "social Europe" and support greater regulation of the financial sector, then the PES could be the party for you.

Why vote for the European People's Party? - the EPP Manifesto

The centre-right European People's Party is one of the big two Europarties (alongside the centre-left Party of European Socialists), and their candidate for the Commission Presidency, Jean-Claude Juncker, has a chance of becoming the next Commission President. So what's in their manifesto? There isn't much of a manifesto on the EPP's own website (you can read about its stance on several policy areas here and they have a party platform from 2012 (PDF)), but there is a manifesto on Juncker's website - helpfully titled "Why vote for the European People's Party?"

The EPP has been the largest party in the European Parliament for the last 5 years and has been the biggest party in the Council (most of the Member States' (senior) governing parties were EPP members) and the Commission. In their manifesto they promote themselves as the responsible party of government that is willing to take tough choices. Unsurprisingly, they support continuing a lot of the current economic and fiscal policies of the Eurozone and talk of fiscal discipline. The EPP calls for structural reforms to encourage investment in new industries and condemns socialists as wanting to spend "other people's money".

The EPP supports an EU energy market and wants more investment in low carbon technologies. On free movement of people, the EPP remains a supporter, while on immigration the EPP talks about the need for stronger integration. Better co-operation on policing the Schengen common border is also an issue. They want a single market in digital services (as I go through the manifestos this is becoming a bit of a running theme), and states its commitment to data protection as a fundamental right.

On foreign policy and the EU's neighbourhood, the EPP thinks that the Member States can become more effective by acting together and stress the need to support democracy in Eastern Europe.

All in all the manifesto seems to be a "mother's apple pie" manifesto - a lot of the aspirations are vague and most of the statements and proposals aren't very controversial (not that there's anything concrete). The strongest themes are those of fiscal discipline and immigration, which is where the Europarty most distinguishes itself from the others.

So if you support the current policy of fiscal discipline in the Eurozone and want better common border controls, the EPP might be the party for you.

"Change Europe, Vote Green" - the European Greens' Manifesto

During last week's debate, Ska Keller spoke a lot about the importance of Green jobs and renewable energy. It's a strong brand for the Greens - I'm sure that most people identify the Greens with those phrases by now - but little was said on how they want to bring this about. The European Greens have released a common manifesto, so let's take a look at what they're proposing.

The European Greens have seized on the language of debt reduction in their manifesto in an interesting way: they talk about the need not just to reduce financial debt (noting the the restructuring of public and private debt is needed in some cases), but also social debt (unemployment) and environmental debt. The Europarty says that it wants the ECB to focus on macroeconomic and financial stability and employment among its policy objectives (as well as its current policy of price stability), and it wants instruments (it doesn't specify which) to stem the brain-drain from crisis-hit economies.

The Greens want a debt redemption fund and eventually Eurobonds for the Eurozone as a way of solving the crisis and support a common minimum approach to corporate and wealth taxes in the EU, arguing that the tax burden falls too much on low and medium earners. It also supports "own resources" for the EU (i.e. the EU directly raises the money that funds it rather than depending on Member State contributions - this would be the opposite of AECR's position, for example).

On renewable energy, the Greens want several measures in the areas of state aid rules, public procurement rules, education, support for social entrepreneurs, among others in its approach. I'm not clear on what these measures are, but presumably laxer rules on state aid and public procurement in favour of renewable energy projects along with support for people setting up Green businesses. A new European Renewable Energy Community is proposed to promote renewable energy in the EU. Nuclear energy is ruled out as an expensive and risky form of energy and they are opposed to fracking. The Greens want a carbon emissions to be cut by 55% of 1990 levels by 2030 and the radical reform of the carbon emissions trading scheme. Without reform of the trading scheme, the Greens say that they would advocate a national carbon pricing floor.

The European Greens are against bio fuels (agricultural land should not be used to produce fuel as this raises food prices), and want to see small and organic farmers promoted under the Common Agricultural Policy, They are also against the patenting of seed and animal material and want better food labeling. The Greens oppose genetically modified organisms and want better protection for livestock by reducing animal transport times.

On immigration and asylum, the Greens want to scrap the Dublin Regulation (which states that people can only apply for asylum in the first EU country they reach) and set up an EU Joint Resettlement Programme to aid in the resettlement of refugees. They also want more coordination on "rescues at sea" since so many people die at sea trying to reach Europe.

The Greens oppose the EU-US Trade Agreement in its current form, criticising the way it was negotiated and voicing concerns that certain financial products and biotech products would be automatically allowed under the agreement. They also oppose investor-state dispute settlement in trade agreements like the one with the US, which could be used by investors to undermine environmental and social standards in the EU.

Democracy and anti-corruption is also a topic in the Greens' manifesto. They want the voting age lowered to 16 for European elections and transnational lists for those elections. The European Parliament should have a say over the EU's coordinated economic policy and the Court of Justice and Court of Auditors should be given more powers in fighting corruption in the EU. The European Parliament should be able to decide on its seat (currently it travels between Brussels and Strasbourg under the Treaty rules), and there should eventually be EU-wide referendums.

That should give you a taste of what the European Greens want to achieve (read the manifesto itself for more detail). If you want to support more radical environmental standards and goals, have concerns over the details of free trade treaties and how refugees and immigration is being handled by the EU, and want the EU to take more decisions over its own financing, the Greens might be for you.