PAYING ATTENTION TO WHAT EU CITIZENS WANT

Citizens in Europe are increasingly weary about the current execution of EU policies. They are largely dissatisfied with many of its current policies, and are keeping a close eye on what is being done. Also, they are much more informed about Europe. Finally, people seem to care deeply about who governs them. While support for the Union is high, policy support is not. Hence, a more attentive citizenry makes it even more important for the EU to perform not only in terms of outcomes, but also in terms of procedures. More than ever, political leaders need to defend what they think is the best way forward for European politics. With the political culture of the EU being far from transparent, political leaders must find a way to argue openly about policy measures without being perceived as divided, nationalistic and incapable of taking decisions. In any representative system, the procedural aspect is particularly important as individuals rarely get everything they want in terms of outcomes. What counts then is the belief that institutions provide a fair articulation of individual interests. One reform that most EU citizens agree on in this context is the implementation of referenda. At the same time, they oppose the handover of power to a directly elected President. They clearly prefer a diffusion of power over the concentration in Brussels. Implementing an element of direct democracy in the institutional setting of the EU might be a fruitful way to reassure citizens that they have some control over “what happens in Brussels”.  People now pay attention to European politics but they are not satisfied with what they see. European political decision-making has clearly given its people an inside look into how difficult it is to craft policies to address the looming societal challenges in all 28 member states. Thus, while system support is high, policy support is not. If elites fail to address discontent over policy outcomes, worries about how decisions are made and goodwill may fade. If people feel that their voices are not heard in Brussels, they may turn against the project altogether. Setting aside these concerns may seem tactically beneficial to national governments in the short term, but the long-term consequences may threaten the very existence of the Union.

The Eurozone and refugee crises have pushed reform of the EU to the forefront of the political agenda. How can an union of 28 states with a population of over half a billion be reformed to best address future crises and challenges? Finding an answer is extremely difficult, not only because actual reform proposals range from fully fledged political union to a partial repatriation of powers to nation states, but also because we lack data about support among the national populations for reform. However, it is only if political leaders in Brussels and across European capitals provide a vision that can be shared by a majority of Europe’s 500-million-strong population, can political and economic reform be sustainable. If EU and national leaders move swiftly to further pool policy and institutional competencies without the backing of the EU public, this will most likely backfire.

What Stands Out About Preferences for EU Reform?

1. On average, people prefer an EU that is not too expensive, and of more or less the current size (28 member states). They want an EU that is predominantly designed to safeguard peace and security, as well as to promote economic growth, and about which they themselves can make decisions in referenda.

2. People in the EU as a whole strongly oppose the idea of a directly elected EU President taking decisions, even those that clearly favour more political and economic integration in the future. People are on average largely indifferent about national governments or the European Parliament being the key decision-makers.

3. Important cross-national differences in EU reform preferences exist. For example, the Spaniards and Poles, currently net recipients of the EU budget, are willing to pay more for the EU in the future, while Britons, French, Germans and Italians — all net contributors — are not. The French are equally enthusiastic about the prospect of decisions being taken by a directly elected President compared to the European Parliament, while the British clearly prefer national governments being in control or decisions being made through referenda. Finally, there are differences based on policy preferences: while people in the South and East care about economic growth, citizens of the North favour a Union dealing with peace and security. They view the regulation of immigration as equally important to growth.

4. Although there are no differences based on gender, EU reform preferences do differ based on age. Generations primarily disagree about who should take decisions in the EU and what policy goals the EU should focus on. In France, Italy and Spain for example, younger generations favour decision-making via referenda rather than the European Parliament, while in Germany, older generations do. When it comes to policy preferences, both the oldest and youngest generations in the EU favour an EU that safeguards peace and security over one that promotes growth.

5. When it comes to how EU preferences mediate support for EU reform, there are no differences based on level of EU knowledge. Yet, there are  clear differences based on Europeans’ overall scepticism about the EU. Regardless of whether people are sceptical about their country’s membership in the Union, the Euro, further political and economic integration, or the overall policy direction in the Union, sceptics differ primarily in their views about who ought to take decisions. In contrast to supporters, sceptics are much more opposed to a Union in which European actors make policy. The type of EU reform that sceptics most want to see is towards more national control, either by means of citizen referenda, in which national publics decide, or through national governments.

6. Alongside more intergovernmental decision-making, sceptics also value an EU that regulates immigration more; some even prefer it to one that promotes economic growth

Policy Areas Needing More Attention:

1. Harmonizing taxes across Europe
2. Securing borders
3. Reforming immigration policies
4. Helping poor countries
5. Strengthening consumer protection laws
6. Fighting climate change
7. Supporting economic growth
8. Investing in infrastructure
9. Reducing inequality
10. Secure peace and security