FIFTY-SIX candidates are contesting the six seats available for Cyprus at the European Parliament. So there is plenty of choice for Cypriot voters. But, who would be the ideal Member of the European Parliament? To be able to answer this question we first need to understand some facts about the European Parliament and what the job description entails.
The members of the European Parliament, or “MEPs”, are elected directly by European citizens. This was not always the case. The first direct elections took place only in 1979. It is for this reason that the Parliament represents the will of the people. The task of the Parliament is to “co-decide” together with the Council which represents the interests of the governments of the member states.
The Parliament enjoys the right of “co-decision” mainly on internal market issues. Its powers in matters of foreign policy or on justice and home affairs are more limited. However, on a number of issues the Parliament wields considerable powers which are designed to provide a counter-weight to those of the Council. For example, it approves the members of the Commission who are nominated by member state governments. It may also dismiss the Commission but only as a group. That is, it cannot dismiss individual Commissioners; at least not yet. The Parliament also has the final word on the budget of the EU and approves international treaties and the accession of new member states to the EU.
The Parliament, therefore, has a very important role in shaping the policies and evolution of the European Union. Its members who are elected for five-year terms need to have a pretty good knowledge of European affairs.
The European Parliament, like all parliaments, is an organised talking shop. Members are divided in many different committees which examine in minute detail every legislative proposal. Given that the recent enlargement of the EU will raise the number of MEPs to 732, the “power” of each one of them depends on two things: the “political grouping” in which he or she sits and his or her eloquence. MEPs do not sit in the Parliament according to national party affiliations but according to EU-wide political alliances. Currently, the conservatives form the majority. It may change next week, however. Apart from these alliances, the extent to which an MEP can make a difference depends on his or her ability to speak convincingly and master the complexity of technical European rules.
MEPs should also be able to act independently of the governments of the own countries. Otherwise they may not protect the interests of those who elected them. This may sound strange. How can the interests of the voters be different from the interests of their own governments? Well, the answer is simple. Member-state governments routinely fail to apply and enforce EU rules, often to the detriment of some of their citizens. Perhaps more importantly, the European Parliament is there to ensure that governments acting together in the Council do indeed live up to their commitments.
Members of the European Parliament must also have a strong stamina because they need to travel incessantly – much more than their national counterparts. In addition to commuting between Brussels and their constituencies, they have to spend a week per month in Strasbourg where twelve plenary meetings of the parliament take place every year. MEPs publicly object to this wasteful arrangement which was secured by France many decades ago as a means of generating jobs in a then stagnating city. The cost of the monthly trek will rise to €200 million from €170 million per year following the enlargement of the EU.
There have been many attempts to move all the functions of the Parliament to Brussels. However, I suspect the entry of new member states will make it very difficult to change the system. This is because MEPs benefit handsomely from the travel rules of the Parliament. They get reimbursed the cost of first-class travel irrespective of the class in which they actually travel. This is a scandal. But since MEP salaries are linked to the salaries of their national counterparts and since almost all of the MEPs from the new member states will be earning less than even their secretaries in Brussels, reimbursement of non-existent travel costs will become an important supplement of their take-home pay.
So, the ideal candidate for the European Parliament is one who knows much about Europe, can speak eloquently, is not a poodle of the national government, is healthy enough to withstand the rigours of modern travel and is wealthy enough so as not to be tempted by the grossly inefficient working arrangements of the Parliament. Oh, and if he or she speaks French it will help. Both Brussels and Strasbourg are French-speaking. Now you can rank the fifty-six candidates.
You may also be tempted to do what most other Europeans do when there are European elections – ignore them. This temptation may be even stronger in the case of Cyprus whose representatives will constitute less than 1 per cent of all MEPs. They will hardly make an impact. But don’t make that mistake. One of the most valuable services that MEPs perform is to bother the Commission by asking awkward questions on behalf of their constituents and put the latter in contact with the right persons in Brussels. After all, who else do you know in Brussels apart from your MEPs? You may think of Mr Marcos Kyprianou, the Cypriot Commissioner. But he will hardly be available and it is not his task anyway to offer help to individuals. So, my ideal MEP is above all someone who understands that his or her true mission in Brussels is to help his constituency benefit from EU membership.
Criticism is an indispensable element of a functioning democracy. Starting from today I will list in my articles Cypriot blunders committed in Brussels. Hopefully the fact that they are publicly identified will induce our officials not to repeat them. First on my list is the recent rejection by the European Parliament of the Cypriot appointee for member of the Court of Auditors. I wonder who coached him for the hearing before the relevant Parliamentary committee? Apparently, he made a mess of it. The Parliament objected to his equivocal answers and perceived arrogance towards the concerns of the MEPs.
Another recent blunder was the representation of Cyprus by the Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of Finance at the Economics and Finance Council meeting that took place in May. The other twenty-four member states were represented by their ministers.
I have spotted a third, but not serious mistake, in a recent publication of the national contact points for football in the Official Journal of the EU. All member states with the exception of Cyprus and Poland had provided full postal and email addresses. Poland had given only the name of the relevant national authority without any address or telephone number, while Cyprus provide only a telephone number and an email address with no reference to who or where the national authority may be. Admittedly, this is not anything serious, but it shows that Cypriot authorities can be unnecessarily careless.
Phedon Nicolaides is Professor, European Institute of Public Administration, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
