Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

European parties in the post-Lisbon reality

  • Article
  • Published:
European View

Abstract

European elections have long been considered ‘second-order national elections’. However, the Treaty of Lisbon brings about a window of opportunity, particularly when it comes to reinforcing democratic legitimacy and political participation in the EU. This article tries to shed light on potential ideas to make European Parliament elections more comprehensible and attractive for the citizens of the EU. Two steps in this direction are to establish a clear-cut link between the European Commission (both the president and its members) and the European elections, and a proposal for a new type of European manifesto. Successful implementation of these ideas requires reform in the content of the work of European parties.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. 1998 Treaty of the European Union.

  2. The Andrew Duff Report [2] represents a further step in the direction of consolidating the European party political system, as does the Marietta Giannakou Report [5].

  3. Other changes introduced by the latest Treaty are the further increase of the powers of the European Parliament by extending the co-decision procedure, the further extension of the role of qualified majority voting (QMV) in the Council and the entry onto the scene of national parliaments as safeguards of the subsidiarity principle. For a better understanding of the Lisbon Treaty, see also Bonvicini [1].

  4. The terms European parties and Europarties refer to the organisations of transnational political parties cooperating at the European level.

  5. The EPP played an important role in the development of this idea, as in 2004 it had already made an explicit declaration that, as the winning party of the 2004 European elections, it would not support a candidate president for the Commission should he or she not be from its ranks.

  6. According to Article 17, Paragraph 5 of the Lisbon Treaty: ‘As from 1 November 2014, the Commission shall consist of a number of members, including its President and the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, corresponding to two-thirds of the number of Member States, unless the European Council, acting unanimously, decides to alter this number’.

  7. In the example of Hungary and the 2009 European elections mentioned above, Fidesz elected 14 MEPs while the Socialist party elected 4.

  8. The term ‘elections to the European Parliament’, the official name under the Lisbon Treaty, should be changed to ‘European elections’ as their effect now goes well beyond the European Parliament synthesis.

  9. The Treaty revision, necessary to implement this proposal, could find support from political forces often critical of any new Treaty.

  10. Sceptics of this proposal might be convinced by an opt-out clause for member parties that consider the final document unsatisfactory.

  11. See also [7].

References

  1. Bonvicini G (ed) (2009) Democracy in the European Union and the role of the European Parliament. Quaderni IAI (Istituto Affari Internazionali), English Series 14

  2. Duff A (2011) On a proposal for a modification of the Act concerning the election of the Members of the European Parliament by direct universal suffrage of 20 September 1976. Committee on Constitutional Affairs of the European Parliament. Report. 28 April

  3. European People’s Party (2002) A constitution for a strong Europe. Estoril Congress document, English version, Paragraph 47. Available at http://www.epp.eu/library.asp. Accessed September 2011

  4. Follesdal A, Hix S (2006) Why there is a democratic deficit in the EU: a response to Majone and Moravcsik. J Common Mark Stud 44(3):533–562

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Giannakou M (2011) On the application of regulation (EC) No 2004/2003 on the regulations governing political parties at European level and the rules regarding their funding. Committee on Constitutional Affairs of the European Parliament. Report. 18 March

  6. Katz R, Mair P (1995) Changing models of party organisation and party democracy: the emergence of the cartel party. Party Politics 1(1):5–31

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Mair P (2006) Polity-scepticism, party failings, and the challenge to European democracy. Netherlands Institute for Advanced Study in the Humanities and Social Sciences, Uhlenbeck Lecture 24. Available at http://www.nias.knaw.nl/Content/NIAS/Publicaties/Uhlenbeck%20Lecture/Uhlenbeck%20Lecture%2024.pdf. Accessed October 2011

  8. Priestley J (2010) European political parties: the missing link. Notre Europe. Policy paper 41. 4 November

  9. Reif K, Schmitt H (1980) Nine second-order national elections: a conceptual framework for the analysis of European election results. Eur J Polit Res 8(1):3–45

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Ricard-Nihoul G, Sydow G von (2010) From institutional reform to mass politics or how to engage citizens in the union of Lisbon. In: Fabry E, Ricard-Nihoul G (eds) TGAE II: the contribution of 14 European think tanks to the Spanish, Belgian and Hungarian Trio Presidency of the European Union (January, 2010–June, 2011). Notre Europe. March 2010

  11. van der Eijk C, Franklin M, Oppenhuis E (1996) The strategic context: party choice. In: van der Eijk C, Franklin M (eds) Choosing Europe? The European electorate and national politics in the face of union. University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor, pp 332–365

    Google Scholar 

  12. Wonka A (2004) Delegation and abdication? The appointment of the European commissioners and its policy implications. Mannheim Centre for European Social Research, Working Paper 84. Available at: http://www.mzes.uni-mannheim.de/publications/wp/wp-84.pdf. Accessed October 2011

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 20, Petras St., 10444, Athens, Greece

    Michalis Peglis

Authors
  1. Michalis Peglis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Michalis Peglis.

About this article

Cite this article

Peglis, M. European parties in the post-Lisbon reality. European View 10, 221–230 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12290-011-0178-y

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12290-011-0178-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation