The European Commission yesterday announced the results from the latest Eurobarometer poll – carried out in May during the height of the crisis – with a press release carrying the headline, “EU citizens favour stronger European economic governance”. 75 percent of Europeans, we are told by the press release, are in favour of giving the EU a stronger role in the coordination of member states’ economic and budgetary policies.
EU Justice Commissioner Viviane Reding – who also is in charge of Communication – commented:
The clear majority for enhanced European economic governance shows that people see the EU as a decisive part of the solution to the crisis.
Clearly, something fishy is going on here, not least since such overwhelming support for EU action is conspicously absent from the rest of the poll (26 percent of people say that they consider the EU best placed to deal with the financial and economic crisis, for example).
And sure enough, the Commission is trying to take us for a ride.
Respondents to the Eurobarometer survey were only asked whether or not “a stronger coordination of economic and financial policies among all EU member states” would be effective to combat the ongoing crisis (see p. 38 here). The question doesn’t even mention the role of the EU or the term “European economic governance”. Creatively, the Commission then adds up the respondents who think that stronger coordination would be “very effective” (26 percent) and those who only find it “fairly effective” (49 percent) to reach the 75 percent figure.
Seriously, how stupid do they think we are? By no stretch of the imagination is this the same as 75 percent of Europeans being in favour of giving the EU more powers to monitor national economies, which the Commission is trying to make us believe in its press release.
The Eurobarometer survey could have asked this question instead: “Do you think that the EU should be given more powers to monitor your country’s economy, including decisions on public spending and taxation?” We suspect the result would have been completely different.
What the Commission really should be focussing on is the troubling fact that only 49 percent of respondents think that EU membership is “a good thing” down from 53 percent last year. Or that the percentage of people who think that EU membership is “a bad thing” has reached its highest level in a decade – now at 18 percent (see p. 12).
What’s more, the percentage of people who think that EU membership is a good thing has decreased by 5 percent in France and the Netherlands, for example, and by a striking 10 percent in Germany (down to 50 percent) in only one year. 45 percent of Germans (and 52 percent of Austrians and 36 percent of Swedes) also associated the EU with “waste of money”. Incidentally, these countries are all net contributors to the EU budget.
Only 19 percent of Europeans associated the EU with “democracy”.
Is the Commission getting the hint? I hope so, but somehow I doubt it.
#1 by Ralf Grahn on August 27, 2010 - 2:18 pm
Mats Persson,
As Director of a lobby group specialised in EU affairs, you must be aware of the fact that the European Commission (which commissions the Eurobarometer polls) works in an institutional framework created by the member states of the European Union.
Thus, your addressees should be the governments in the national capitals (and their representatives in the European Council and the Council), if you wish to launch reforms to democratise the EU.
Please, do.
#2 by SSJ on August 27, 2010 - 6:36 pm
It’s a bit funny that this pathologically eurosceptic UK lobby group’s name is Open Europe, when the opposite of the EU would be the closed and dangerous Europe which existed for centuries.
#3 by DOCM on August 27, 2010 - 8:58 pm
In this instance, it seems to me that Mats Persson has a point. There is nothing fishy going on, however, simply a matter of the Commission seeking to put the best gloss on what is a rather dismal survey. The real question is: to what are those questioned responding? Certainly not the issues that exercise Open Europe. They want a Europe that works. The present generation of leaders – and those “institutionalists”, both for and against the EU, who continue to insist on the need to fix things that are not broken – seem intent on ensuring that it cannot.
On one point:
QUOTATION The Eurobarometer survey could have asked this question instead: “Do you think that the EU should be given more powers to monitor your country’s economy, including decisions on public spending and taxation?” We suspect the result would have been completely different. UNQUOTE
It is not the job of the Commission to pose hypothetical political questions in its surveys. There is ample scope in the treaties, as revised in the Lisbon Treaty, to do all that is necessary in the matter of economic governance. What is lacking is the necessary political will on the part of the major Member States.
#4 by Jules Cantor on August 27, 2010 - 11:10 pm
you must belong to the minority 25% who do not want more EU economic governance. As a mainstream European I will always respect your right as an individual belonging to a minority (a half-brit-half-swede-thank-God-outside-euro-zone-area) to disagree, however poor and hollow your arguments against EU integration may be.
#5 by Pedro on August 28, 2010 - 6:00 am
Cheers Jules Cantor!
I only have one question for Anti-Europeans, but it seems that nobody cares to reply:
“If you don’t like the European Union for what it is…why not work to change it?”
Then why not put your energies towards eliminating the ‘democratic deficit’ of the European Union? Why not?
Why not be honest with yourself and everyone else? The question for some people is not about “transparency” and “openness.” For some people it is about living in the past (can’t have anything to do with Germans, look what they did in ‘39). It’s also about arrogance and ignorance (if we can’t dominate, then we shouldn’t participate). Xenophobes hold such views. Simply be honest…..
I look forward to the day when the European Union will evolve into a Democratic Republic (it will take longer than it should because of people that work against the Union). I look forward to the day when I, and my fellow 500 million citizens have greater input in the governance of the European Union. You see Marcel, I’m not a xenophobe, I don’t live in the past, and I don’t harbour hatred for people whom weren’t even alive in 1939.
Germans, French, Spaniards, Maltese, Finns, etc. are my fellow citizens…something I am very grateful for.
#6 by Eurocentric on August 28, 2010 - 9:47 am
You start off with a very good argument: that the Commission shouldn’t read into this a public endorsement of economic governance (after all, it hasn’t been agreed on or properly defined yet). However, the rest of the post falls into the same trap (and indeed another one altogether as well).
First of all, we don’t know what results other questions would have got. Therefore it’s a bit ridiculous to imply that theoretical poll questions would provide a firmer basis for action than the vague questions actually asked. Second, the questions you propose are also vague. Try asking “would you like another tax?” in a national setting, devoid of context or a public debate on what the tax is, who it would affect, its pros and cons, and what the consequences on the rest of the budget would be, and then see if you get a answer good enough to base tax policy on. Also, just as economic governance is too vague at the moment to proclaim support for it, if you asked the question, it will hardly get an informed reply.
As for the Commission having something to “get”; perhaps it has, but it’s hard to read anything into the statistics. After all, a sudden drop suggests recent events affected trust, etc. This suggests, but we can’t be sure, that the Eurozone crisis, or the handling of the crisis in general is the issue. But whether or not people want more or less integration, more left-wing or right-wing policies, or where disappointed with the hesitant actions of the European Council (or just the result), we can’t say.
Which is why I think all this reading into Eurobarometer polls – or other polls, or even theoretical poll questions, for that matter – is an exercise in spin by definition. We simply can’t divine the policy stances of the public from such things.
#7 by Mike Cunningham on August 28, 2010 - 8:41 pm
Pedro,
I look forward to the day when the Commission, The Council, together with all the hangers-on are directly elected, because that will be the day that Democracy rules within Europe! Because when they are elected, that means we can GET RID of them!
Until that happy day, the Brussels Bureaucracy rules, because that is the way the original planners set things up, with a useless talking shop named the European Parliament.
Democracy! The European Union cannot even spell the word, never mind understand what it means!
#8 by bretagneteaparty on August 29, 2010 - 12:19 pm
be it in opinion polls or in referenda, the EU bureaucracy or political elite does not want get the point… the peoples of europe would have rejected the lisbon treaty. we got it anyway. the peoples of europe would also reject “economic governance”. we will get it anyway.
keep talking Mr. Persson. we, the (majority of) peoples of Europe, hear you loud and clear – unlike the Euro cheerleaders who have commented on your post…
#9 by Pedro on August 30, 2010 - 6:33 am
TO Mike CUNNINGHAM:
Interesting comments Mike.
Are you from an island where the head of state is an unelected monarch?
[[[[[ That's an inherited office, rule through birthright ]]]]]
Same island where the prime minister is also not elected by the people into that office?
[[[[[[ In the uk, elites of the governing party choose the PM ]]]]]]]
Are you from that island off the coast of civilization that elects deputies to it’s parliament via party representation, not proportional representation?
[[[[[ This system is undemocratic as it completely distorts the will of the people ]]]]]
That same island, that in 2010, has a “house of lords?”
[[[[[ Another chamber of inherited seats ]]]]]
Very same island that does not have a Constitution, enshrining in writing, the rights of the citizen. You’re not from that island, are you?
Are you a ’subject’ of another person instead of a citizen in a nation of equals, subject only to the rule of law?
You’re not from an island where ‘The People’ do not have the right of recall of their politicians, are you?
Mike, are you from an island COMPLETELY VOID OF THE ‘KRATIA’ OF THE ‘DEMOS?’
Mr. CUNNINGHAM: Are you casting stones while living in a very, very fragile glass house?
I GUESS SOME PEOPLE HAVE YET TO UNDERSTAND “DEMOCRACY” AND THE DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC!
#10 by Mike Cunningham on August 30, 2010 - 11:38 am
Pedro,
In reply to your selective comments on the country of my birth, I would make the following points:-
Yes, Her Majesty is a Hereditary Monarch, but also a Constitutional one, where she can comment upon, but not overrule any laws of her Parliament.
Our Prime Minister is elected by a majority of the Members of his or her party, who are elected. Some are lousy, some, such as Baroness Thatcher, were exceptional! We like our system!
We like the idea of voting for people, not formulas, and we have successfully achieved this state over some nine hundred years, which is a lot more than some of the arriviste . As for being democratic, what can be more democratic than people voting for people?
We used to be proud of the House of Lords, when it was of a hereditary principle, as the occupants could be trusted to be disinterested of Party, and scrutinise laws on principle.
Now it has been gerrymandered by the Labour Party, not so much pride exists.
We have the finest Constitution in the world, based upon Magna Carta, the most impressive legal document in the world!
I am proud to be a subject of her Majesty Queen Elizabeth! Are you proud to be ruled by another grasping, grabbing politician?
True, we cannot recall our MPs, but we are getting there. This is only because it is only very recently that we have seen the need to get rid of those who have failed us.
I understand Democracy only too well. I live in a Nation-State which was a bulwark against tyranny in 1939, where we celebrate 70 years since heroes fought to block the advance of Naxi dictatorship; I live in a country which did not grasp, welcome or cheer fascists; I live in a country where we used to be able to defend ourselves against terrorists by kicking them out, but are now constrained by imported laws and rules from Brussels; I live in a country where we can still say pretty much what we like, and not have the Gestapo round within five minutes.
Yep, for all its faults, I can say that I like living in a country such as Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and I dislike very much being subject in any way whatsoever to the edicts and utterances of the bureaucrats of Brussels!
#11 by Pieter on August 30, 2010 - 11:54 am
Wasted words. “Open Europe” is not a think tank. A piece of advice: Never argue with them about the EU and its institutions. They drag people down to their level and beat them with their rich experience in mud-throwing contests.
#12 by Eurocentric on August 30, 2010 - 2:11 pm
@ Mike Cunningham
I studied law in the UK, and I can tell you that the UK does not have the finest constitution in the world, and the Magna Carta isn’t exactly the finest legal document either, particularly if you’re looking for embryonic democracy. The UK constitution has been called an “elective dictatorship” by legal academics, because the rights of people are not enshrined in constitutional law (in fact, the courts are slowly trying to remedy this by protecting the Human Rights Act and other constitutionally important Acts from “implied repeal” by parliament. However, they are still vunerable from explict legislation). You blame Labour for warping the constitution (I think they’ve a mixed record that went especially sour towards the end), but the point is that they could do it. Any UK government, with its docile parliament can change the constitution and the rights of people as it wished (though it’s harder with a coalition government).
As for the Magna Carta, it mostly deals with land rights and land sale and inheritance rather than rights as we would now understand them. The goal was to concentrate – or keep it concentrated – in the ruling class and to protect the serf system that was under strain. It was important at the time, since land wealth was almost the only form back then, and it is a very important legal and historical document. But it’s had more of an impact on English and Irish land law than parliamentary ideas.
#13 by Sebastian on August 30, 2010 - 6:19 pm
I never thought I would agree with anything uttered by Open Europe. But this time you have a point, I was actually thinking the same thing. The poll results are rather abysmal. Clearly the EU needs to do something to restore and build its legitimacy before it is too late. I would propose making the governments hold elections for the representatives to the European Council and to make the Commission terms coincide with the parliament terms.
#14 by Pedro on August 31, 2010 - 7:18 am
To Mike Cunningham:
Mike wrote: “Yes, Her Majesty is a Hereditary Monarch, but also a Constitutional one, where she can comment upon, but not overrule any laws of her Parliament”
In a Democracy, the Head of State is chosen by ‘The People’, this is not something to be bequethed.
Mike wrote: “Our Prime Minister is elected by a majority of the Members of his or her party, who are elected. Some are lousy, some, such as Baroness Thatcher, were exceptional! We like our system!”
Some people in North Korea may like Kim-Jong Ill. How does any such nonsense pertain to Democratic values?
Mike wrote: “We like the idea of voting for people, not formulas, and we have successfully achieved this state over some nine hundred years, which is a lot more than some of the arriviste . As for being democratic, what can be more democratic than people voting for people?”
Democracy is not simply about ‘voting’ for people. Democracy is established when the power of government flows from ‘The People’ to government, not from government to ‘The People’
Mike wrote: “We used to be proud of the House of Lords, when it was of a hereditary principle, as the occupants could be trusted to be disinterested of Party, and scrutinise laws on principle.
Now it has been gerrymandered by the Labour Party, not so much pride exists”
Such an unwavering belief in Democracy! Proud of a unelected chamber of government?
Mike wrote: “We have the finest Constitution in the world, based upon Magna Carta, the most impressive legal document in the world!”
The Magna Carta has absolutely nothing to do with Democracy! It’s a document which diminished the absolute power of the ruling King or Queen by transferring powers to other royals. This document has absolutely nothing to do with the ‘common people’. You do not have a written Constitution. Rights of the citizen is a matter for ‘Acts of Parliament’
Mike wrote: “I am proud to be a subject of her Majesty Queen Elizabeth! Are you proud to be ruled by another grasping, grabbing politician?”
In a Democracy, politicians are ruled by the people (right of recall of elected officials, also known as impeachment).
Mike wrote: “I understand Democracy only too well. I live in a Nation-State which was a bulwark against tyranny in 1939, where we celebrate 70 years since heroes fought to block the advance of Naxi dictatorship; I live in a country which did not grasp, welcome or cheer fascists; I live in a country where we used to be able to defend ourselves against terrorists by kicking them out, but are now constrained by imported laws and rules from Brussels; I live in a country where we can still say pretty much what we like, and not have the Gestapo round within five minutes”
When british troops reached Berlin at the end of WWII, they needed permission from the Soviets to enter the city (let’s not minimize the greatest sacrifice made by the people of any one nation. 20 million Soviets perished fighting Nazi Germany). Your bullwark is more like bulls**t in comparison!
Mike wrote: “Yep, for all its faults, I can say that I like living in a country such as Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and I dislike very much being subject in any way whatsoever to the edicts and utterances of the bureaucrats of Brussels!”
The European Parliament is a Democratic institution (like it or not), it is elected by ‘The People’ The Lisbon Treaty contains a citizens’ initiative, whereby one million citizens, from any number of member countries, will be able to ask the Commission to present a proposal in any of the EU’s areas of responsibility.
The uk does not have bureaucrats? WOW! You elect all of your civil servants???!!! Amazing, considering that you don’t even elect your Head of State and/or Head of Government!!!
It is paramount that one know the meaning of the word “DEMOCRACY” before commenting on the concept!!!!!
#15 by alan on September 1, 2010 - 7:08 am
No, that’s the present EU, not the opposite of the EU. I take it you like having a European government based on the government of the Soviet Union?
The European Parliament has no power whatsoever; it is a mere rubber-stamp institution, the Supreme Soviet to the . The so-called “Citizens’ Initiative” is not direct democracy, since it does not require the appointed Commission to enact proposals submitted via such a process; the Commission merely has to “consider” them, which means the Commission does what it pleases no matter what, and they end up with a list of people to watch as possible subversives as a consequence should the proposal be rejected summarily. Before holding up “democracy” as a paragon of the perfect government, make sure the example you are using is not a pseudodemocracy where the people only get to elect powerless rubber-stampers (a hallmark of some of the worst totalitarian regimes in history, mind you), and please don’t ever make the mistake of trying to cite constitutional monarchies as non-democracies again, especially those with separation of powers and checks and balances, two things that the EU does not have. P.S. One of the most important of the Magna Carta’s contents was its guarantee of the Writ of Habeas Corpus — the European Union legislated that away back in September of 2008 by permitting “trial in absence”, another mark of an unfree society.
#16 by duo on September 1, 2010 - 10:41 pm
Uff all these brits and their anti-EU bashing. They think that the UK is so democratic and open, plz!! Stop with your unfounded sense of being special as the UK is just another regular country, join the fully the EU or leave…so tired of your arrogance, you are not expetional in anything anymore. The only thing u are known for is causing trouble all over the world, cyprus, kashmir, palestine etc. Go read the sun or daily mirror and blast foreign coaches for that failure of a national team
#17 by Sebastian on September 3, 2010 - 4:58 pm
@Alan,
The separation of powers and checks and balances are in fact very intricately and fundamentally present in the European system. The system is divided up between three parties: Commission, the parliament and the governments. The governments and parliament are directly elected by the people, while the commission is appointed by the two, as I am sure you know. This creates the system whereby the proposals must please both the governments and the parliament, leading to an atmosphere of checking pros and cons and leveling out the various political interests.
Now compare this to the British system. You have got the government and the parliament. The parliament is directly elected and the government is appointed by the parliament (formally by the queen). If a proposal is made by the government, it is rarely if ever rejected by the parliament leading to a system where no checks and balances need to be performed and where the separation of powers exists only in theory.
It seems clear this is not what the EU should strive for. To achieve more democracy it would be enough to have directly elected representatives to the council.
#18 by David Lonsdale on September 4, 2010 - 1:37 pm
The Eurobarometer gives a total EU picture. The picture in the UK is quite different and if you got rid of us, as I hope you do, then the Eurobarometer would give a more favourable impression of the EU.
Most Brits want to leave the EU. Only the politicians keep us locked in. One day the people will have their way and Britain will be out of the EU. The sooner the better!!
#19 by Jules Cantor on September 5, 2010 - 10:17 pm
Thanks to the Treaty of Lisbon – Article 50 – UK can now leave the EU! Hurrah! just say the word and go! you do not like the EU, we do not like you! just go! and then you would perhaps stop whining. bye.
#20 by Marcel on September 8, 2010 - 8:49 pm
#2 by SSJ on August 27th, 2010 – 6:36 pm
It’s a bit funny that this pathologically eurosceptic UK lobby group’s name is Open Europe, when the opposite of the EU would be the closed and dangerous Europe which existed for centuries.
At least we are not fascists who want to create an undemocratic Reich like the anti-democracy/pro-EU crowd.
#21 by Chris on September 10, 2010 - 2:33 am
Besides their archaic nationalism, British Eurosceptics are also the puppets of R. Murdoch and all the other UK hard-line capitalists who perceive the EU as a threat to their business. I bet that Open Europe is funded to some extent by this lobby.
So the fishy stuff is going on around Mr. Persson.
#22 by Leo Axt on September 22, 2010 - 12:58 pm
Man, finally those awful Brits are getting some intelligent comments challenging their idiocy. At least at the eyes of people who understand some of the big concepts being thrown around here.
The really depressing part about those Brits is that they not only just display hatred, arrogance, egoism while upholding archaic and nocive values without understanding them, but the endless repeating and underlining their utter stupidity and ignorance.
the very fact that you are unable to get your politicians to leave the EU should make you think twice whether you want to end up at their mercy, without the checks and rights the EU provides to you, which the non-existent constitution fails to do within the UK.
Plus, ask Northern Irish and Scots whether they enjoy being in a boat with you. If you think it through to the end, you people seem so full of hatred you couldn’t even stand to live in one country with any of your personal neighbors!