A toothless watchdog, by design
Elections for the European Parliament are around the corner and all Greek political parties have published their lists of candidates. As many others already noted, the lists are dominated by TV personalities, actors, athletes and journalists. Clearly the parties are not looking for individuals with some kind of expertise or European vision; rather they are looking for well-known names to attract votes. This is, of course, nothing new as it has been going on for years but is Greece an outlier? Do other EU countries act in a similar way? Is the ticket of the French Socialists or German Christian Democrats dominated by personalities rather than seasoned politicians or experts?
The real question, I think, is: Do EU countries consider the EU Parliament to be a serious institution worthy of their best and brightest? My view is that they do not. Besides Greece, how many other countries send important politicians to Strasbourg? How many first-rate politicians consider the EU Parliament to be the right place for them? As far as I can tell, and someone might know more and correct me, there are four types of individuals chosen to be members of the European Parliament (MEPs). One type is the well-known non-political personality who is chosen for one or two terms. They have no political aspirations and they do next to nothing while in office. Another type is the politician who is going nowhere, someone who might have tried for elected office in their national scene and failed or were not deemed right for a national position by their party. Such individuals are given a shot at the EU Parliament as a consolation prize and treat their time in Strasbourg and Brussels, where the European Commission is based, as such. Another category is the politicians who are at the end of their career in national politics and Brussels becomes a sinecure; a place to spend some time, and collect a good salary, before one rides into the sunset. Still another category is the “politician in exile” – someone who is important domestically but somehow lost in an inner-party struggle and now they are in “exile” in Brussels waiting for the day they can make a comeback.
It is clear from the above that EU members do not take its Parliament seriously and that becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy; member-states don’t take the EU Parliament seriously thus they do not send the best possible candidates to Brussels; as a result that body remains the least important of EU institutions. A body elected directly by the people of Europe has less powers than appointed EU bureaucrats.
Politicians and citizens are pretending that the EU Parliament is an important institution while, at the same time, they all do their best to keep it a superfluous body
This is done, of course, by design. National governments do not want the EU Parliament to have real power and gain a substantive supervisory role over national parties and policies. Thus everyone, politicians and citizens, are pretending that the EU Parliament is an important institution while, at the same time, they all do their best to keep it a superfluous body. This is then the root of the problem; Greek political parties, and those of other countries, do not want the European Parliament to have power, make sure it does not and thus it is ignored. This, in turn, makes the position of MEP not as important and as a result the people chosen to serve are who they are.
I have the impression that most people prefer their national parliaments to formulate policy – not that of the EU – hence what is going on these days is exactly what everyone (or at least most) want. Clearly the European Union is not ready, at least not yet, to be the ‘United States of Europe.’
John Mazis is an author and a professor of history at Hamline University in Saint Paul, Minnesota.
