Parliament, or gravy train? EP representation head JULIAN VASSALLO fields questions about the perception of next week’s MEP election as a political version of ‘Who Wants To Be A Millionaire’...
Recent polls appear to indicate a drop in voter turnout since 2004, though it remains to be seen by what percentage. Among the reasons cited by would-be abstainers (in Malta and elsewhere) there appears to be a perception of the European Union as a gravy train, with candidates more attracted to perks and salaries than in representing their constituents. How do you react to this sort of criticism? It is true that some people have bought into the idea that on June 6 they will vote to make someone rich. But the EP elections are not another version of “who wants to be a millionaire”. MEPs are well paid for what they do are given all the facilities and staff to be well-informed legislators for half a billion people, and what is probably the second most powerful legislature in the world.
We should judge our MEPs not by their allowances but by whether they are using them to better service their constituents.
Much of their expenses go towards operating from three locations: Brussels, Strasbourg and their constituency. Most MEPs would like to take Strasbourg out of the equation but that requires a Treaty change that Member States’ governments have refused to make.
Would the EP interpret the above sentiment as an implicit lack of trust in itself as an institution? If so, how seriously? I don’t think there is a problem of trust in the institution as a whole. According to Eurobarometer, 64% of the Maltese have faith in the EP – which is higher than their faith in all other EU institutions as well as all Maltese political institutions including the Maltese Parliament.
That said, there are clearly several elements that might lower Malta’s voter turnout but most have little to do with the European Parliament itself.
What would you say to people who claim that would rather not vote for these reasons? That politics is a vocation but one that does not involve vows of poverty.
Whatever the result, the composition of the EP will invariably change to some degree or other after June 7. Does the EP Office expect a radical shake-up of the current balance of power within the parliament? I think if there is a radical shake-up it would be the result in large shifts in voter turnout. The MPs expenses crisis in the UK, which I believe has implications for democracy that extend beyond Britain, could have an unexpected impact on results.
We are also likely to see the establishment of a new political group made up of British Conservatives, Czech eurosceptics and others. This will weaken the EPP-ED group, but perhaps not enough for them to lose their status as the largest political grouping in the EP.
What do you think are the main issues influencing voter decisions across Europe (within reason)? I think Europeans across the continent have the same worries that we have as Maltese, minus the bad roads, perhaps. We are all concerned about an intertwined list of worries including the economic recession and its impact on our jobs, environmental degradation and its impact on our health, and the price of basic household services and its impact on our work-life balance.
Add to those concerns the challenges of migration, climate change and a more dangerous and unpredictable world and you have an electorate feeling very vulnerable and confused.
That list alone should be enough to convince us of the need to send our best people to the European Parliament.
What will the incoming parliament, whatever its composition, find itself facing in its first few months of office? The balance of power amongst the political groups in the European Parliament will have an immediate impact on the political direction of the most important institutions in the EU apart from the Court of Justice.
The political colour of the new President of the Parliament and the President of the European Commission will effectively be decided by the voters in the EP Elections. Mr Barroso’s hopes of securing a second term in the next weeks are dependent on the EPP-ED remaining the largest group in the EP. The EP will also grill the individual members of the new Commission in the autumn.
If the Lisbon Treaty is fully ratified by October the EP will have to transform itself in view of the very significant new powers it will receive as co-decider on 90% of EU legislation as well as all of its budget including structural funds.
This week, the EO Office’s installation in Sliema was vandalized with a slogan all-but identical to another, similarly vandalized EP installation in Brussels. What do you make of this coincidence? Well, we asked a question (What sort of borders do we want?) and now we got an answer! (One world, no borders). To be honest we suspected that it was a matter of time before it would be vandalised. It was the message that surprised us. Given the mixture of reasonable concerns and irrational fear on illegal immigration in this country we expected it to be quite the opposite.
It probably is just an interesting coincidence but in this interconnected world it could just as easily have be orchestrated. We wanted our campaign to start a debate with young people. Maybe we pressed one of the right buttons.
How do you interpret the ‘message’, conveyed to the European Parliament in both Malta and Brussels? I think Robert Schuman would be proud. I don’t think he would have messed up his suit clambering over a billboard to spray his vision for a united Europe, but his ideas were at least as revolutionary as what our own vandals are suggesting today. After all the Europe he sketched out has proved to be the world’s best border crusher.
Any comments?
If you wish your comments to be published in our Letters pages please click button below. Please write a contact number and a postal address where you may be contacted.
Download front page in pdf file format
All the interviews from Reporter on MaltaToday's YouTube channel.
