An unprecedented number of far-right, fascist and openly racist members of the European parliament were elected last month. It presents a major challenge for UK MEPs but a major subtext of these developments has been the huge contrast in the way Labour and Conservative MEPs have reacted to the negotiations which follow the European elections leading to the creation of the parliament’s main political groups and the parliament’s contribution to key positions in the European commission and council.
Last month was bleak in some ways for progressives looking at European-wide election results. While Labour increased its total number of MEPs from 13 to 20 we will be entering a European parliament where far-right and Tea party-style populist parties like the United Kingdom Independence party and Beppe Grillo’s Five Star movement were elected in fairly large numbers. In terms of the far-right, France’s National Front gained 24 MEPs, Greece’s Golden Dawn three MEPs, Jobbik in Hungary three MEPs and the Dutch PVV four MEPs. In Germany for the first time since 1945 a Nazi party won a European seat, so too did long-standing far-right parties such as the Danish People’s party and True Finns.
The reaction of Labour MEPs is to ensure that we work hard within our transnational Socialist and Democrat group to meet the challenges presented by these results and that we also listen to the electorate and understand the need for reform of the European Union with a renewed focus on jobs and growth. This includes an understanding that we must bring forward proposals such as a commissioner for growth and a range of other imaginative proposals rather than just working on our own in isolation in the European parliament.
The contrast with Conservative MEPs could not be more stark. Reduced from 25 to 19 MEPs, Conservatives proceeded to rebuild their breakaway European Conservative and Reformist Group by attracting to it the Danish People’s party and True Finns. To give a flavour of why the European press were so astonished by this move one has to understand that the Danish People’s party leader Morten Messerschmidt was convicted in 2002 for publishing racist material and MEPs in their Finnish sister party, if you wish to Google them, will astonish you with their unsuitability to form an alliance with our current British party of government.
In addition to their new far-right allies, David Cameron became increasingly uncomfortable that his Conservative MEPs welcomed Alternative für Deutschland into the ECR, as it is not only Germany’s only Eurosceptic party but a great irritant to Angela Merkel. By leaving the EPP in the last parliament and now deepening their alliances with openly racist and homophobic parties and parties antagonist to their main centre-right allies in the rest of the EU, Cameron is making both moral and strategic political errors with his MEPs. Should the Conservatives win the next general election any so-called renegotiation of Britain’s position in the run-up to a referendum will be made even more difficult by the actions we have seen in the past few days.
This is just one consequence of the changes to the new parliament. Labour MEPs supported by progressives here in the UK need to redouble their efforts to ensure that our progressive agenda in the EU is not damaged over the next five years. Labour MEPs now form the third largest group in the Socialist and Democrat Group after Italy’s Partito Democratico and Germany’s Social Democrats. We will be working on the mainstream issues of importance to our voters but we also understand that the European Union is a union of values and Conservative MEPs, with their recent alliances, clearly misunderstand this point.
———————————
Claude Moraes is deputy leader of the European parliamentary Labour party and MEP for London
Labour at Westminster needs to propose primary legislation to disapply in the United Kingdom any decision of the European Parliament that had not been supported by the majority of those MEPs who had been publicly certified as politically acceptable by one or more seat-taking members of the House of Commons.
….never heard of the principle of ‘independence’ for members of Parliaments, key in a democracy? And why should MPs in Westminster be rated higher than MEPs? I genuinely believe they’re worth less actually, in terms of legitimacy. Westminster MPs are elected with the First Past The Post system, which excludes an incredible 49.99% of voters from having a role in shaping the nation’s legislation. I can’t honestly call that ‘democratic’. Also, because we’re talking of elections that see turnouts of 35%. So, an MP in London represents who really? On the other side, MEPs, despite suffering a low turnout in the UK (but not elsewhere in Europe, interestingly), are elected on a proportional basis, all votes count. An MEP represents far more his voters, no doubt about that. Until FPTP is amended to allow for more representation within Westminster, the House of Commons is nothing more than a private club.
And why should MPs in Westminster be rated higher than MEPs?
Because the House of Commons is the House of Commons. It has no equal. As Michael Foot or Tony Benn could have told you.
Yeah, right.
Yes. Right.
And, indeed, Left.
I hope you will seriously consider raising the issue of the free movement of labour throughout the EU, which is a major cause of unhappiness amongst the poorer members of most Western Members, including France and the UK. Any acceptable restriction would be a help. The economically and educationally disadvantaged people in the UK cannot compete with the type of people from Eastern Europe who have the ability and the will to emigrate. If these people were solicitors, or chartered accountants, or any other middle class professions, they would not be allowed to compete for these jobs in the UK as they are strictly controlled by the professions. Why then should the lower classes be unprotected in their employment rights.
Also, could you please get the Common Fisheries Policy abolished. This gives rights to our 75% of EU fisheries to other members of the EU, which we get no compensation for. Is there another policy that gives the UK rights to other members land or resources at no cost? And as we also have 75% of the useful wind power in the EU can you also ensure that the EU does not devise a law that would restrict our use of wind turbines.
Claude, you got my vote at the last elections, and I’m happy you made it.
I would expect Labour to work with other Europeans to strengthen Europe, not weaken it.
Freedom of movement is key. If we accept that we can invest in another country, move money there or from there, buy services or goods from a different European country as you would here, I find totally unacceptable that people should be the only factor whose movement is ‘restricted’ or ‘regulated’. The whole idea of the EU-wide market area is about increasing competition, strengthening skills, opening more options and giving more choice. If I can buy an insurance policy from Austria at a cheaper price, UK based insurance companies can operate in Austria and compete. The same applies to people. In a unified market people must be free to move where they’re needed. Most of them don’t move willingly, some will go back or move again, others will settle down, but the dynamism this brings is invaluable. Throughout history, when countries have opened to immigration, great favourable economic cycles have always followed. Always. And sadly, the reverse is true, all documented.
We need to stop trashing EU freedom of movement, the only response that can help lower unskilled British working classes that feel threatened by this is to raise their skills, to broaden their mind, teach them another language for God’s sake, let’s use education to make British people open to the world and less insular. Good luck, Claude.