Interesting Times in Britain

Thursday’s election in the UK returned, against all expectation, a majority Conservative government.  In the months in the lead up to the vote the polls had shown the Tories and Labour in a tight neck-and-neck race to become the biggest party in the Parliament, with UKIP, the Liberal Democrats and the Greens also fighting for seats. The Scottish National Party was on course to overturn the Labour majority in Scotland, and all the talk was of a hung parliament with Ed Miliband’s Labour party in a better position to form a coalition or minority government.

In the end Labour was heavily defeated in Scotland and England. The defeat in Scotland was so devastating that the SNP now hold all but 3 of the Scottish seats, with their candidates unseating Labour heavy-weights (Labour’s foreign affairs spokesman was unseated by a 20-year old politics student, who will presumably be automatically granted her degree by the university). The Conservatives managed to take some seats from Labour (the net exchange was slightly in Labour’s favour, but they didn’t make up nearly enough ground to offset their Scottish losses), and the Lib Dem seats were divided by the Conservatives and Labour, leaving them with a mere 8 seats.

A majority Conservative government and a strong SNP presence in the Parliament heralds some interesting times for Britain. Cameron has had trouble with the rebellious right-wing of the party in the past, which has driven him into ever more Euroskeptic positions. The slim majority his government will have means that these rebels could have a big impact on the government, ensuring that it is steered further to the right.  Meanwhile, the SNP were elected on a platform of being anti-Conservative and anti-austerity, as well as seeking to maximise Scottish autonomy within the UK after the failed independence referendum. Together with the two big issues of this parliament – how to deal with devolution in Scotland (and its effects on England) and how to define the relationship with the EU – it looks like the next 5 years will be politically turbulent. Already this weekend Cameron appointed Michael Gove as Justice Secretary with the job of repealing the Human Rights Act that transposes the European Convention on Human Rights into UK law.

Since Cameron announced the referendum on EU membership in 2013, he has failed to properly articulate what he wants to change. The last government laboured over a report on the UK-EU relationship, which was meant to be a comprehensive inquiry into the balance of competences. It got a lot of PR at the time, but ever since the report concluded that the balance of competences are pretty much right, the report has sunk into political obscurity. The referendum, whether in 2016 or 2017, will now have to be held, but the shape of a “reformed EU” that would be acceptable to anyone has yet to be defined.

It’s going to be a rocky few years in the UK…

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.

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.

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: 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.

A Europe that Works: the Liberal Manifesto

One of the main gripes I had with Guy Verhofstadt's performance in the debate last week was the lack of any policy ideas (certainly not unique to him, however), so let's take a look at the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe's (ALDE) manifesto to see if it puts any meat on the federalist bones.

The slogan for the Liberals is "A Europe that Works", and the manifesto (PDF) stresses market integration and the defense of civil liberties. ALDE, like the AECR, also promotes the cutting of red tape, though from a more federalist perspective where the red tape is 28 sets of national rules that impede the single market. The Liberals want to "reinforce the single market in energy, the digital market, financial services, transport and healthcare sectors, while further facilitating the free movement of services and workers."

On the economy, trade and jobs, ALDE is for an EU-US Trade Agreement, easier access to finance for SMEs, a genuine single market in telecommunications (phasing out mobile phone voice and data roaming charges by 2016), and a "fifth freedom" of free movement of knowledge. This free movement of knowledge would focus on mobility for students, academics and researchers between Member States and would support dual training, university and enterprise across borders. ALDE wants a shift from EU support under structural and cohesion funds towards research and investment in "future oriented sectors such as the renewable energy sources sector".

Overall, ALDE wants to limit EU spending on subsidies and move the money towards job creation and investment. I assume that this means that EU money should be attached to particular cross-border infrastructure projects and the free movement of knowledge mentioned earlier. Another goal of ALDE s to have the Member States providing declarations that the EU money spent with them is spent legally and certifying it as adding value. (If memory serves a similar Dutch proposal went down like a lead balloon because the other Member States didn't want to risk getting blamed for the misspending of EU funds or to spend resources on the accounting).

On the Common Agricultural Policy, ALDE will shift EU support from subsidies to modern agricultural technologies and their introduction into farming. Similar to its general economic policy, the Liberals appear to go against direct subsidies, but want government support for developing new methods and technologies before introducing them into the market.

ALDE essentially supports the current Eurozone austerity approach: "Fiscal solidarity depends on fiscal discipline which avoids moral hazard and does not reduce economics incentives for sound public finance." They support the banking union and want better control and sanction mechanisms to enforce the stability and growth pact. On justice and home affairs, ALDE supports the Common European Asylum System and wants a common cybersecurity policy. They want to create a mechanism to monitor violations of fundamental rights in the EU and enforce sanctions - a policy clearly inspired by the concern over the constitutional changes in Hungary.

Overall, ALDE are standing on a economically right-wing platform mixed with strong support for fundamental rights and civil liberties in the area of justice and home affairs. Economically, it is probably quite close to the AECR and the EPP and would have few problems forming a coalition with them, but when it comes to civil liberties, justice and home affairs, and European integration, it is probably closer to the PES and European Greens. If you're attracted to liberal free markets and value a good voice on civil liberties when the EU is considering laws like the Arrest Warrant, ALDE might be for you.

Semi-Participation? European Conservatives' Manifesto and debate participation

The Alliance of European Conservatives and Reformists are in the strange position of complaining that they weren't allowed to participate in the debate between the Europarty candidates for European Commission President, while opposing the idea of running candidates altogether. It seems odd to argue that they won't run because there isn't the interest or connection with people to legitimise the election... and then loudly complain that they can't participate in the debate that they were afraid of legitimising.

The AECR are in a complicated position by being anti-federalist and wanting to largely limit the EU to the single market. The fear that participating in the race for the Commission Presidency will legitimise federalism seems to be misguided to me. While sitting out the debate makes sense for Euroskeptic parties who want to dissolve or withdraw from the EU, surely since the whole point of the AECR is that it is not fundamentally EU, but wants to reform it, the AECR should be organised towards winning posts and influence within the EU institutions to make that happen. By running a candidate, the AECR could have influenced the debate and challenged the other so-called federalist parties. Already Juncker's position seems more friendly to intergovernmentalism: having a candidate further to the right (on whose party's support the EPP may have to rely on in the Parliament) could drag the EPP further towards its position.

So what is the AECR's platform? AECR President, Jan Zahradil, says:

"The AECR rejects harmonised taxes, EU embassies and an EU army. We believe in rolling back the EU bureaucracy to a point where it can provide all citizens with the benefits of free trade, free movement of people, goods, services and capital, improved competition and strong families. We are here to speak for the millions of Europeans who do not want to be part of a federal super-state."

The AECR seems to be running more on its principles than on a manifesto per se, but the Parliamentary group of European Conservatives and Reformists (the AECR sits in this group in Parliament) produced an alternative programme for the Commission's work in 2014, so that might be a good place to start.

The AECR makes furthering the single market in areas like the digital market a priority, and talks about cutting red tape. It's identified a "Top 10 most burdensome legislation" that the AECR wants to be changed for SMEs: the Common system of value added tax; data protection laws; general product safety, Measures to encourage improvements and safety and health of workers at work; Posting of workers in the framework of the provisions of services; Procedures for the award of public workers contracts, public supply contracts and public service contracts; Recognition of professional qualifications; Recording equipment in road transport for driving and rest periods; Refund a value added tax to taxable persons not established in the Member State of refund but established in another Member State; and Registration, Evaluation, authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals.

The ECR group strongly supports the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership Agreement and wants more trade negotiations with India and ASEAN. It opposes any legislation on Information and consultation of workers, and wants the reform of the Working Time Directive. Interestingly, the ECR says that "There is a need for a robust single rulebook for all credit institutions in the EU under the authority of the European Banking Authority" (page 9). You can read more about the ECR's position on other areas, like justice and home affairs, the environment and energy here (PDF).

The AECR is running in the election on its free market and anti-bureaucracy credentials, but it's not necessarily running everywhere in the EU. The member parties of the AECR can be found in 12 EU Member States (in some cases it's representation from a Member State is an independent MEP rather than a party). This limits the AECR's chance for success, though as the 5th largest block in the European Parliament has participated in coalitions on some legislation before.