Charlemagne: Free the Strasbourg 626

Date: 07/02/04

Why ambitious young politicians are leaving the European Parliament

IT IS often said that the European Parliament is a powerless institution filled with self-important nobodies. This is most unfair. The parliament is crucially important to the shaping of European Union legislation. And students of recent history would have a great day people-spotting in the Strasbourg corridors. Among the characters they might bump into would be scions of Europe's political dynasties: a de Gaulle, a Macmillan, a Gil Robles. There are even politicians who have made their own names: Mario Soares, first prime minister of democratic Portugal, whose office notes that he is “holder of countless prizes from over 40 countries”; Antonio di Pietro, an Italian magistrate whose investigations into political corruption in the 1990s brought down governments; and Dany Cohn-Bendit, who led student revolts in Paris in 1968 and is now leader of the Greens.

There is still plenty of life in some of these old dogs. Mr Cohn-Bendit this week launched a bold experiment in pan-European politics. At present, European elections are essentially national affairs. Parties such as Labour in Britain, the Socialists in France and the Social Democrats in Germany run their own campaigns, often on largely national issues, and only come together as part of the Socialist group when they are back in Strasbourg. But in next June's European elections, the Greens will become the first political group to run a genuinely pan-European campaign - with common posters, spokesmen and policies across all 25 EU countries. Mr Cohn-Bendit argues that this is a vital step towards the creation of a European political consciousness.

The leader of the Greens is perfectly qualified to front such an experiment. Bilingual in French and German (the French deported him to Germany in 1968), he hopes to switch from a French to a German constituency in June. But the Greens' campaign also inadvertently highlights the difficulty of creating pan-European parties. For the party is hopelessly split along national lines on the most fundamental issues of European politics. Mr Cohn-Bendit is an ardent federalist, who believes in the euro and the new EU constitution. Greens in Britain, Ireland and Sweden are Eurosceptics, who have campaigned against the euro and will certainly oppose the new constitution. To get around such awkward divergences, the Greens' election campaign will focus on issues they can safely agree on: food hygiene, sustainable development, energy policy and so on.

Mr Cohn-Bendit believes it can work. But he is upbeat about the European Parliament in general, dismissing any notions that its legitimacy is undermined by feeble participation in European elections. He points out that a turnout of just under 50% in the elections in 1999 is roughly comparable with that in American presidential elections (and higher than in congressional ones). True enough - but the European figures are boosted by the fact that voting is compulsory in some countries, such as Belgium and Greece. In countries where voting is not compulsory, turnout can be lamentable: eg, 30% in the Netherlands, 24% in Britain (and a poll this week suggested that British turnout might fall as low as 18% in June).

A longstanding federalist radical such as the leader of the Greens may still be convinced that pan-European politics is the wave of the future. But some of Mr Cohn-Bendit's younger colleagues seem to have come to the opposite conclusion. Helle Thorning-Schmidt, a Danish socialist, and Nick Clegg, a British Liberal Democrat, are widely regarded as two of the brightest young MEPs. Yet both are standing down at the next election, in favour of running for their national parliaments in 2005. Their decisions are the more intriguing because, on paper, both look like model “Europeans” who should unhesitatingly be making their political careers in the EU. Both are graduates of the College of Europe, an elite finishing school for aspiring Eurocrats; both speak several European languages; both have married spouses from another EU country. Even more tellingly, both believe that the EU is overwhelmingly a force for good. And yet both have decided that the European Parliament is a political dead end.

Fear and loathing in Strasbourg

Ms Thorning-Schmidt complains that the main impression that Danes have of their representatives in the European Parliament is that they have lavish and easily abused expense accounts. She says it is “incredibly demoralising, always to run into this suspicion that you are only in it for the money.” She hopes that as a national politician she is less likely to be treated with automatic suspicion and disdain. Mr Clegg admits that some British MEPs who have previously been MPs in Westminster have warned him that he is making a terrible mistake by moving back to British politics. He accepts that he is likely to have had more impact on legislation in Strasbourg than he can ever hope to have as lobby-fodder for the Liberal Democrats in Westminster. But, as he also says, “I actually feel slightly queasy exercising all this power that you have as an MEP on such a slender democratic mandate.” And more important than mere scruple is his feeling that, although MEPs may fiddle with the technicalities of EU legislation, fundamental questions about Britain's relationship with Europe - will the country join the euro? will it sign up to the new constitution? - are going to be decided “where all politics begins and ends: at home.”

There is another consideration. The European Parliament is comfortable and interesting, but ultimately somewhat anonymous. There are a few famous MEPs, such as Mr Cohn-Bendit, but none that has made their name in the sterile pastures of the parliament itself. By contrast there are plenty of instances of former MEPs who have gone on to much bigger things back home: for example, Ana Palacio, Spain's foreign minister, or Geoff Hoon, Britain's defence secretary. Legislative power may go on flowing towards Europe. But ambitious politicians still seem to want to return home.

Feature looks at the question of why some MEPs are leaving Strasbourg to return to national politics.

• Primary Source