The European Parliament has acquired growing powers since the first direct European elections in 1979. But there have been concerns in many EU member countries that Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) have become more remote from the citizens they represent. Professor Simon Hix from the London School of Economics and Political Science examined the voting patterns of MEPs in the Parliament to see whether the acquisition of greater powers by the Parliament had strengthened the connections between MEPs and those they represent. His study asked: what influences MEPs votes, were they along party or national lines, for example? Unlike previous research, which was based on sampling, his study analysed all the votes of every MEP since 1979.
Key findings
Parties matter in Europe: National political parties are affiliated to European party groups, and these groups have become as cohesive as the US Congressional Democrats and Republicans. By the same token, voting on national lines has decreased.
Parties split on a left/right axis: The parties split along the traditional left-right lines common in most domestic European democracies. In the mid-1990s, the European Peoples’ Party (mainly Christian Democrats) moved rightwards compared to the Party of European Socialists and the European Liberal, Democrat and Reform Party. Like domestic parliaments, the parliament is partisan and competitive on a wide range of issues.
MEPs toe the party line: Like many domestic parliaments, individual MEPs within national or European party groupings have a range of different views on policies and reform questions. But, even where they have different views, they tend to vote with their party and group. Conflicts between national and European parties are rare.
How they are elected matters: However, MEPs selected by the national party for ‘closed lists’ where voters back a party rather than a candidate are far more likely to vote along party lines than those personally elected by voters or selected by local party organisations.
Power changes behaviour: European parties have become more powerful as the Parliament gained extra powers. As a result MEPs have greater policy and leadership responsibilities, often related to their party group. They therefore have a greater incentive to vote along party lines. The growing power of European parties has also meant policymaking is increasingly transnational rather than dictated by solely national interests.
More powers to come? The extra powers gained by the Parliament have not undermined the existing powers of the Council of Ministers (representing national governments). But if the Parliament were able to elect the European Commission President, this would give substantial power to the largest party group in the Parliament.
Think small, electorally: MEPs should be elected on ‘open’ rather than ‘closed’ party lists in relatively small districts, with candidates selected locally. This would reinforce the transnational nature of MEPs and prevent the Council and national parties combining to impose their will on the Parliament.
About the study
The research was carried out by Professor Simon Hix at the London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE). It involved collecting and analysing roll-call voting data and MEP characteristics from the European Parliament from 1979-2001. A questionnaire was sent to all MEPs sitting in 2000, with a comparatively high 33 per cent response. Follow-up unstructured interviews were conducted with 40 MEPs from all party groups. The researcher also visited the Parliament to observe key votes, plenary sessions and party group meetings.
Key words
MEPs, Europe, European Union, European Parliament, politics, democracy
View all other award details