PUBLIC POLICY ADVOCACY AND THE NEW BRUSSELS LANDSCAPE

Voters across the EU have elected the most fragmented European parliament ever - a move which will have a lasting and profound effect on how member states, will relate to Europe. The results, in the context of years of economic recession, unemployment and lack of growth, represent a major challenge for the main stream parties to overcome. Centrist parties have seen their representation shrink. This newly elected parliament will be home to a strong nationalist movement which may stall progress and delay consensus. The notable increase in numbers of extremist parties of the left and right, along with a wide variety of populist and anti-EU parties, will see the centre-left Social Democrats and the centre-right European People party forced into cooperation by necessity, if not desire. They will need to form a grand coalition of the centre ground on many issues in order to actually get legislation passed. Whatever these events mean for the body politic as a whole, they have great significance for the future workings of the European parliament.

At key stages in the legislative and other procedures the European parliament generally has to muster an absolute majority of 376 votes (50%+1 MEPs) to get its position approved. However, neither the two biggest groups can now come close to that number on their own. The S&D could form alliances to its left with the Greens and the United Left group (GUE); but it would not be enough. The EPP has much less room for maneuver to its right. The likelihood therefore is that there will need to be a grand coalition between the EPP and S&D in order for business to progress. Failure to achieve that could reduce the European parliament to impotency but such a coalition will also mean that controversial measures are unlikely to be approved.

The new parliament will probably try to avoid, if possible, the need for absolute majority votes - for example it is possible for legislation to be agreed at first reading which only requires a simple majority. That means that anyone trying to influence the parliament's position will need to get their arguments across at the earliest opportunity in the process. The indifference of a fifth of the parliament towards the legislative process will also mean more work being done by less people. This will have a notable impact on legislation and advocacy.

The election results across Europe make the need for EU reform clear. The EU needs to provide economic growth, not hinder it. The European parliament will play a crucial part in passing that reform agenda. The problem, however, for the EU as a whole is that the very reforms wanted and needed will run up against the ethos of the protest parties who now have such significant influence. David Cameron wants to see reforms that increase EU economic efficiency, strengthen the single market, loosen the rules around employment law and increase competition. Reformers want the European Commission to improve the single market while staying out of other areas of competence.

However, many of the protest parties are anti-globalisation and protectionist. The National Front’s battle cry, “France for the French”, typifies this. Many want to see less influence of the single market rather than more. This contradicts the reform agenda. The big question is, how do we construct a reform agenda that takes Europe forward, rather than backwards?

The strength of far right and far-left parties must be taken into account. This reinforces the need for careful building of new relationships and maintaining old ones.

It may become harder to push for pro-business positions. Concessions and compromise are likely to characterize advocacy work. Decisions in the EP will become harder to predict, given the need for grand coalition compromises, the polarisation of the plenary and fragmentation of the political groups. More than before, decisions are likely to be negotiated behind closed doors and the success of advocacy activities will only be determined on the day of the vote. Even more than in the past, MEPs will position themselves taking into account their national party’s position as opposed to their EU political groups. It may be more important than ever to emphasize the national implications underpinning policy tasks.

The main challenge for public policy advocates will be not to find themselves in a deadlock, but rather to be able to work within the new landscape and find hooks and supporters to get their ideas across. Influence is going to be much harder to build and public policy advocates will need to build coalitions. Much more than in the past, we will have to be present on the ground of Member States capitals.

Awaiting the new MEPs will be a long list of policy questions in which they must weigh in: How to spend a € 1trillion budget; What rules to impose on technology titans such as Google and Facebook, Whether to back a trade deal with the U.S. But before all that, a game that truly rivets Brussels will begin: allocating jobs in the EU institutions. It will involved months of wrangling, bargaining, chest-beating and the parliament and member states decide who will steer the EU project over the next few years.

Trade

Following the European elections, a new obstacle to concluding the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) and Transatlantic Free Trade Agreement (TAFTA) has been added. An increased number of MEPs are sceptical. Populist and mainstream parties fear it will water down the EU’s environmental and food-safety standards in the interests of multinational corporations. Opponents also warn it will make it easier for companies to sue governments. If agriculture and food safety regulators are included in the deal, the new EU parliament is especially likely to seek to kill it.

Financial Services

Since 2009, the parliament has passed laws that remade the financial sector, resetting the rule book for banks, markets, insurance and establishing a banking union for the eurozone. The next five years are expected to be less busy. But important proposals are unresolved. MEPs will weigh in on a proposal to hive off the trading arms of big banks to make them safer and easier to handle in a crisis. There are incomplete plans to regulate thousands of EU benchmarks, from the Libor interest rate to coal and salmon. The parliament’s economic committee will also be keen to hold to account the new institutions of the European banking union.

Energy

The most urgent agenda for the next parliament will be the energy and environmental targets for 2030, landmark goals that play a key role in determining the investment plans of the European industry. These targets must be decided by October 2014. While the previous parliament urged the 28 member states to pursue a more ambitious course, arguing for stronger targets for renewable energy usage and energy efficiency, the alliances expected in the new parliament mean that it will be less able to challenge the Commission and the Member States.

Digital

MEPs will fight hard to defend their draft proposal on privacy, which sets tighter rules on how companies such as Google and Facebook can exploit EU citizens’ online personal information. These measures include giving citizens the ‘right to be forgotten’, which will allow them to request that websites remove sensitive information or image, as well as forcing online companies to seek explicit consent to use their personal date. The parliament’s proposal will also bolster national regulators’ powers, including giving them the ability to slap hefty multibillion-euro fines on large companies that breach the new rules.

EU Reform

The enthusiasm for treaty change is waning. This makes some MEPs pause, particularly since any treaty change may be used a UK demand that power be returned from parliament to member states.

European Commission

Regarding the European Commission, the names of the new Commissioners will not be confirmed until early autumn, after the hearings. The key question to ask is from where do these new Commissioners take ideas and inspirations to form their five year plan. Public policy advocates should outline 3 to 5 strategic issues that they can suggest to the new Commissioners before the hearings take place. Bringing the new Commissioners something that will make them gain visibility, popularity and political clout will make them very happy.