Ian Taylor MP
Chairman, Conservative Europe Group

The European Parliamentary elections normally fail to set the pulse racing. Plagued by apathy, recent turnout has been lamentably low. The electoral system remains cumbersome and unfamiliar. MEPs do not have a close association with a particular constituency as in national elections. Moreover, far from exercising judgments on European matters, such as the performance of MEPs, participating voters this year are more likely to deliver a verdict on domestic politics and personalities; a warm-up exercise for our impending general elections.

However, given that the June ballot will directly determine the European Parliament’s composition and political direction, these negative and insular voting trends are worrying. This state of affairs might suit eurosceptics, who much prefer to see the EU fragmented and discredited than democratic and effective, but it is counterproductive. The EU institutions exercise, through delegation by national parliaments and governments, some key responsibilities and powers. The outcome of the elections will have an impact on the EU as a whole and in turn on the UK. The European electorate, including Britain, would do well to acknowledge the election’s significance in the wake of emerging regional and global problems, where closer EU cooperation will be necessary.

We are faced with a raft of international challenges well beyond the nation state’s power to resolve alone. I recall Douglas Hurd’s perceptive analysis: “The world is run on a paradox. On the one hand the essential focus of loyalty remains the nation state. On the other hand, no nation state.... is capable of delivering to its citizens single-handed the security, the prosperity or the decent environment which the citizens demand. The nation state is immortal: the nation state is incapable.”

The litany is long and tough: How to co-ordinate economic policy during a recession which ignores national borders? How best to balance the sometimes conflicting requirements of tackling climate change while enhancing security of energy supplies? How to respond to increasing US expectation of a more cohesive European defence effort? How to establish a coherent strategy for managing Russia’s ambitions if we are to prevent further destabilisation in the region? Even if the UK faces a more acute challenge and threat from terrorism than most of the other European nations, how can facing up to the dangers best be shared so as to preserve the open society, and the open European system based on consent that we have constructed over the last half-century?

On each of these areas, to move forward we need to set out the framework not just for our domestic policy but also for that of the broader European Union of which we are part. Which means engaging with our partners at every level.

If greater European Parliamentary influence will allow the EU as a whole to have more of an impact, does this mean we are ruled by Brussels? Not unless we sit back and fail to influence the outcomes – which too often seems to be the British habit. Much of the UK’s lackadaisical attitude can be ascribed to a lack of clarity about how the EU is set up and what the decision-making process involves. The European Council consists of elected Heads of Government of each Member State, and the Parliament consists of elected MEPs. Talk therefore of laws being imposed by unelected bureaucrats in Brussels is simply nonsense.

The Commission has no powers to govern Britain or anywhere else for that matter. When it comes to determining EU legislation, the Commission has no votes. It is in effect a civil service driving forward the policies set by the Council and the Parliament. It can initiate policies but their implementation depends on agreement with national Ministers and MEPs.

The UK is a full member of the EU. We participate in the decision-making process and abide by the rules that emerge. It is in our interests that the EU is effective. Sir Stephen Wall (a diplomat who worked for Geoffrey Howe, Douglas Hurd and John Major) has remarked that the past thirty-five years has seen a succession of British governments who have been in the vanguard in pursuit of radical political aims (CAP reform, the single market, free trade, economic liberalisation) while being reluctant to contemplate any significant institutional change. We need to revive the political will which propelled the EU towards such laudable achievements.

Unfortunately, the EU currently lacks the sense of urgency which captured imaginations in past decades. The EU should be capable of being more influential: it has the largest combined GDP in the world bar none; it is equal to or slightly larger than that of the United States. 60% of the world’s special development aid comes from the European Union. The EU is powerful potentially, but not actually. It could do more, but to succeed it would need a committed Britain on board. A good start for us would be to look to the European elections as a tool by which to achieve change that is in the UK’s interest.

From a Conservative perspective it matters that there is a strong and large Conservative delegation to the next parliament. Yet we are weakened overall if Tories increase their representation but the centre-right group in the European Parliament reduce theirs. Working effectively in whatever new group we Conservatives form in the next parliament will also require close co-operation – even a coalition - with our friends and allies in the European Peoples Party which we are intending to leave. The balance of political power will determine the nature of decisions for five years – not only on legislation and budgets but also on ratification or rejection of appointments to the Commission.

During the campaign, let us remember therefore that the outcome is important both here in the UK and within the EU if we are to shape policy formation. In essence MEPs have two jobs. One is back home, helping individual constituents or organisations with specific problems or challenges to do with the EU. The other is in the Parliament itself, where they help shape European law. Sometimes the two roles overlap. Both aspects are important enough to turn out on 4th June. Perhaps it is not too much to hope that the debates in the UK will be more uplifting and better informed than recent evidence predicts. We need to raise our sights above the domestic mire.

As for the conduct of the campaign itself, we Conservatives should reflect on the fact that for policies to be realisable by our Party in Government they have to be realistic in the closing days of Opposition.