2019Unpublished venueRequires access

SUPRANATIONAL DEMOCRACYADRIFT?The 2019 Elections and the Futureof Europe. Egmont Paper 105

Louise Hoon

Open publisher page 0 citations

Abstract

In May 2019, European citizens will elect a new European Parliament (EP). This Egmont paper discusses what is at stake in these elections, and how they are likely to affect the EU’s search for a new direction in a context of crises, divisions and Euroskeptical contestation. The paper identifies three important developments: polarization on European integration, the erosion of ideational convergence at the elite level and a shared desire to “deliver”, to get citizens back on board. These factors pose constraints to supranationalism and to the European Parliament. Future integration seems more likely to continue on the path of diversified new intergovernmentalism. Such integration does not fix the EU’s democratic deficit, however. In fact, it makes matters worse and can be expected to lead to more Euroskepticism. Therefore, this paper recommends that national parliaments are involved in diversified new intergovernmentalist decision-making in ways that avoid the deadlocks, incrementalism and lack of concern for the EU’s common interest of pure intergovernmentalism. In the long run, the process of European integration can only be secured through political and democratic integration. This implies a validation of the political role of the EP and its elections in the EU’s decision-making. Cosmetic adjustments like the controversial “Spitzenkandidaten process” or the proposed (and rejected) concept of a pan-European constituency will not suffice to achieve that goal.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

In May 2019, European citizens will elect a new European Parliament (EP). This Egmont paper discusses what is at stake in these elections, and how they are likely to affect the EU’s search for a new direction in a context of crises, divisions and Euroskeptical contestation. The paper identifies three important developments: polarization on European integration, the erosion of ideational convergence at the elite level and a shared desire to “deliver”, to get citizens back on board. These factors pose constraints to supranationalism and to the European Parliament. Future integration seems more likely to continue on the path of diversified new intergovernmentalism. Such integration does not fix the EU’s democratic deficit, however. In fact, it makes matters worse and can be expected to lead to more Euroskepticism. Therefore, this paper recommends that national parliaments are involved in diversified new intergovernmentalist decision-making in ways that avoid the deadlocks, incrementalism and lack of concern for the EU’s common interest of pure intergovernmentalism. In the long run, the process of European integration can only be secured through political and democratic integration. This implies a validation of the political role of the EP and its elections in the EU’s decision-making. Cosmetic adjustments like the controversial “Spitzenkandidaten process” or the proposed (and rejected) concept of a pan-European constituency will not suffice to achieve that goal.

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

In May 2019, European citizens will elect a new European Parliament (EP). This Egmont paper discusses what is at stake in these elections, and how they are likely to affect the EU’s search for a new direction in a context of crises, divisions and Euroskeptical contestation. The paper identifies three important developments: polarization on European integration, the erosion of ideational convergence at the elite level and a shared desire to “deliver”, to get citizens back on board. These factors pose constraints to supranationalism and to the European Parliament. Future integration seems more likely to continue on the path of diversified new intergovernmentalism. Such integration does not fix the EU’s democratic deficit, however. In fact, it makes matters worse and can be expected to lead to more Euroskepticism. Therefore, this paper recommends that national parliaments are involved in diversified new intergovernmentalist decision-making in ways that avoid the deadlocks, incrementalism and lack of concern for the EU’s common interest of pure intergovernmentalism. In the long run, the process of European integration can only be secured through political and democratic integration. This implies a validation of the political role of the EP and its elections in the EU’s decision-making. Cosmetic adjustments like the controversial “Spitzenkandidaten process” or the proposed (and rejected) concept of a pan-European constituency will not suffice to achieve that goal.

Key concepts: Intergovernmentalism, European integration, Parliament, Democratic deficit, Incrementalism, Politics, Political science, Democracy

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
SUPRANATIONAL DEMOCRACYADRIFT?The 2019 Elections and the Futureof Europe. Egmont Paper 105 — Research Paper | ScholarLens