Across Europe a mere 57% did not vote on the 7th June, but honestly, who cares? And the results of the PPE (or EPP) – Conservatives / Centre-Right parties, confirm their dominance across Europe. But who cares? To my opinion, this doesn't mean that people have voted for the right or the centre-right, but that the 40% voters who went to the polls were probably biased in favour of centre-right. Because the traditional left parties across Europe are either weakened by their internal problems, or even worse, totally crippled by leadership crises (whether it is the UK Labour, where Gordon Brown had to face resignation of 8 ministers sofar, or the French Socialistes who struggled to elect their leader last year). On top of that, or maybe for that reason, they have abandoned the debate about Europe and left it to the liberals. And that's a shame, because Europe is a reality, and thus deserves to be addressed by left parties, which should provide as strong a vision in that field as they do for national problems.
And that's how the Green / ALE / Les Verts have managed to get such high scores : they occupied the space left empty by Labour & Socialists, talking about their vision of Europe, emphasizing, rightly so, the fact that climate & environment problems could only be tackled at a regional or global level, while proposing solutions in other fields as well. And they were, in France notably, and in other countries, very successful, managing to get up to 15% votes, while traditional left parties were collapsing. They also took advantage from the fact that a number of voters traditionally inclined to the left and who take interest in European issues shifted towards the Green.
An analysis of the pre-election campaigns in both the UK & France shows how the Labour and Parti Socialiste approached the election.
The UK, first. Having opted for a UK-based vote, I watched carefully the messages broadcasted by the main parties, Conservatives, Labour, Liberal Democrats. None of them even said a single word about Europe in what they called the 'European Elections broadcast' (as I couldn't believe my eyes, I had to double-check I'd downloaded the correct programme, and not the local elections part. But yes, it was indeed, but not rightly so, I'd say, the 'European Elections' bit). So it was only babbling about the UK politics, and how each of them would manage this country properly etc...While the Green Party talked about the role they had played, and could play, in Europe, tackling the European Commission on environmental issues (Genetically Modified Organisms, correctly labelled food packaging, toxic-free toys...), but insisting also on the role they could play for education, economy..., using the clever tagline 'You might think you know us, but...think again'. This double strategy of mentioning practical achievements, as well as relating to people's preoccupations in areas traditionally privileged by left parties (economy, helthcare, jobs, human rights) seems to have paid off, as an incremental 45% share of the voters chose them in 2009 vs. 2004.
France then. Apart from the fantastic job achieved by the leader of the newly formed Green union, Daniel Cohn Bendit, or as we call him in France 'Dany the Red', who, like the Phoenix, ressuscited from his ashes ; apart from the impact this character had on the results (15% share of the votes, #2 in France and on-par with the Parti socialiste, with 14 MEPs elected), it is interesting to see how the main parties dealt with the campaign.
Both the Centre-Right (UMP, Nouveau Centre, Progressistes – 28% share of votes, 29 MEPs) and the Green (Europe Ecologie) had simple and clear proposals, covering issues ranging from environment to socio-economics (the following are extracts of their respective campaign leaflets) : 'we will commit to creating a true industrial policy in Europe', 'we will tackle the issue of illegal immigration', 'we will re-orientate our economic model towards a new green expansion based on innovation' (UMP) ; 'create a minimum salary across Europe', 'massively invest in education, research and culture', 'prevent on a European scale diseases such as cancer, asthma, obesity, hypertension' (Europe Ecologie). Those were presented as bullet points, in a very clear presentation that highlighted them. A proper campaign leaflet from people who take the election seriously.
On the other hand, the Parti Socialiste had oriented its campaign on attacking the right, and in particular N. Sarkozy. So instead of focusing on effective proposals, it spent half of the leaflet criticising N. Sarkozy and the impact of the liberal system in Europe. While the other half indeed included a number of effective proposals, these were diluted in the overall presentation, and made the whole leaflet look like it was full of technocratic jargon, made by people who didn't really care for what they were talking about.
So what's going on here? It is well known that the representatives chosen for Euro elections are not the biggest stars of their party. As an example, Brice Hortefeux, elected MEP for UMP/PPE, will not go to Strasbourg, he has higher ambitions for himself (such as becoming Prime Minister for Nicolas Sarkozy). So is it that all these parties consider Europe is and should remain devoted to technocrats, that the European Parliament is just an excuse, that the Real-Politik is till only done in the countries? Most certainly. And this is where it matters. We, the people, need a strong federal Europe, that is not only dominated by a liberal view. And that's where the left parties should take it seriously, that's where they have a definite role to play. They obviously haven't understood it, but the people who voted for the Green 'en masse' have. Future will tell if the left gets the message at some point, instead of focusing on their short-sighted tactics only inspired by getting the votes and staying into power.
