In Germany, we like to look at developments abroad with the “German gaze”. In other words, everything about institutions abroad is described in a very germanized way. Unfortunately, this is often abbreviated and wrong. With German Vote, I am therefore deliberately focusing on and describing various customs and institutions of the EU in the “Bending Bananas & Co” section. It is therefore a kind of institutional lexicon. This installment deals with the EU Parliament.
New episodes are always published in the middle of the month, on the 2nd Monday of the month in German (indicated by a [de]). One week later, on the 3rd Monday of the month, there is the same episode in English (indicated by the [en] in the title). It is not exactly identical to the de-episode, but almost.
Please feel free to connect with me on LinkedIn or Instagram. I will also accompany this podcast with further information on these platforms.
Transcription:
Every now and then I like to explain EU institutions and processes in my podcast. So this is part of my segment called „Bending Bananas & Co“. So the title might sound a bit cynical, but that’s not my intention. Honestly, I find it frustrating how uninformed the discussions around these topics often are. For instance, debates about the curvature of cocambas are a recruiting and endless criticisms of the EU. So this segment is a little bit a glossary though not entirely neutral because critical voices will also be heard here.
In German media spreads much misinformation, especially about the European Parliament. Part of the reason is that the EU parliament is explained through a German lens. Still, it’s also due to a general lack of knowledge. I want claim to be an expert myself, but having studied social sciences and political systems in deaf, I have developed a strong interest in understanding the differences between them.
How legislative initiatives are regulated in the EU Parliament
Members of the Bundestag, including those not part of the government, can propose legislation. It happens regularly, but rarely succeeds because governing fractions usually don’t support opposition builds. Yet it’s a fundamental part of parliamentary duty. The real issue is that members of the EU parliament don’t have the formal right to initiate legislation. MEPs respond to an agenda set mainly by the EU Commission. Add laws are discussed and passed jointly with the EU Council. Of course, informal initiatives and influences do happen.
Marion Walsmann, member of the European Parliament for the European People’s Party (EPP):
„Is that possible if you have no power of initiative? Yes, it works as a member of parliament. I would also like to have the right of initiative for the parliamentary group, but it also works like this. And you already have creative design options. After all, parliament can reject a dossier outright, it can change it completely, it can also simply accept it because it is good, but there are so many variations possible in this whole range and that is incredibly exciting. Some dossiers are adopted with over 1,000 amendments that have to be discussed and voted on. There is an incredible amount of work involved and every member of parliament can table amendments, not only via their committee, but also personally. You are not bound by the opinion of the parliamentary group. You are responsible for yourself.“
There are more similarities and differences. Like the Jean Bundestag, the European Parliament is not a debate parliament, like the British one. Most decisions are made in committees where the complete parliament is voting after what. This results in maritime voting sessions where MEPs often vote according to lists without knowing the details of every proposal, when Martin Sonneborn, MEP from „Die Partei“, plays voting bingo, it might seem amusing, but it is not a constructive approach to this form of parliamentary democracy. He also changed the voting behavior after criticism.
„Working Parliament“ EU
The European Parliament and the German Bundestag are working parliaments, a form of a representative democracy. Breaking away from that model is tough within the EU framework, but possible. Switzerland shows how direct democracy can dominate a system with a government serving as a people’s will manager. That system has pros and cons, too. There is no perfect solution.
The proportional representation system of the EU Parliament
The European Parliament is elected exclusively by proportional representation. This means the percentage of votes a party resides, determined how many seats it gets. In contrast, the German Bundestag used a mixed proportional, the first vote, and majority voting system, the second vote. The proportionality is adjusted through a complex mechanism afterward. Other countries differ. France National Assembly is elected by majority vote. The UK is also a good example of this, but of course, no longer a member of the EU.
One unique feature of the EU Parliament is that large countries give up seats in favor of smaller ones to ensure regional balance. This means proportional representation is limited. You can criticize this of course. The argument for it is that smaller countries should have a say, while the contra argument is that it detracts the voters will.
Other country-specific features include compulsory voting in some places and blocking clauses in many EU nations. Germany is expected to introduce such a blocking clause for the 2029 elections. There is also a corresponding reform proposal that provides for the mandatory introduction of blocking clauses for large EU countries.
How political groups are established in the EU parliament
There’s also a big difference regarding political groups in the EU parliament. At least 23 MEPs from seven member states are needed to form a political group. The 2024 election shout says this can certainly be a challenge. Unlike the most table party structures of the Bundestag, it’s also common for MEPs to leave their groups or be excluded. MEPs without a group face several disadvantages regarding office space, staff, funding, and committee assignments.
After the 2024 election, 10 German MEPs are currently without a group. Some by choice, like Martin Sonneborn and his colleague, Sybille Berg from „Die Partei“, others due to exclusion like Maximilian Krah of the „AfD“, or because no suitable group was found, as with MEPs from „Sahra Wagenknecht Alliance“ (BWS).
No factional coercion in the EU-Parlament
One significant difference from the Bundestag is the issue of party discipline. In theory, party discipline doesn’t exist in the Bundestag either as the members are only accountable to their conscience. In practice though, party discipline is firm. This is less so in the EU parliament where members of the same group often vote differently, especially if they believe their country is disadvantaged by a proposed law.
EU Press Spokeman Thilo Kunzemann, describes it like this:
„Our experience is that in the European Parliament, and this is also the feedback from many MEPs who have worked in the national parliament or in state or regional parliaments, there is much more cooperation across party lines, across party boundaries. So the fact that there are teams of MEPs here is unimaginable in the nation states. That wouldn’t work. But it works here because people know that they also have to find common positions here in Parliament for what concerns them if they want to survive in the subsequent negotiations with the council.“
A big difference to Germany, which actually creates a certain dynamic. This was clearly evident in the re-election of Ursula von der Leyen as EU commission president, it was not clear whether she would be able to convince enough parliamentary groups and within them enough MEPs to re-elect her. The actual number of votes in favor and against cannot be predicted exactly in advance. Now, of course, this is also possible in Germany. We certainly remember Heide Simonis, who was not re-elected as minister president of Schleswig-Holstein in 2005, because there was a dissenter in her own ranks. But that is the expectation raiser than the rule in Germany. There’s much more dynamism in the EU.
Press Spokeman Thilo Kunzemann describes it like this:
„It is always the case with us that every law that we discuss here must then also be negotiated with the council. And experience shows that if you have a position in parliament with a two-vote majority, then it will be very difficult for the parliamentary negotiators to incorporate their position into the final law in the disputes with the council representatives, because the council representatives will then of course say, We don’t need to make so many concessions. Your majority is totally weak and will fall over anyway. We don’t have to go that far to accommodate you. And as soon as parliament has a really large majority behind its positions, it also has a better chance of pushing through this position in the trialog negotiations. And that motivates many, many people across party lines. And regardless of where people place themselves politically, there are still people in all parties here who really want to do factual work, who have issues that are important to them and that they want to push forward. And they still create that special atmosphere that has actually existed here for decades.“
This was another episode of my segment „Bending Bananas & co“, in which I explored the structures and processes of the EU. This time I focused on the European Parliament. More institutions will follow.
Transparency notice for this episode about the Eu parliament
Here is a transparency notice for this episode. This episode includes statements and information from the EU Parliament. Statements from the EU Parliament were recorded by me during a trip to Strasbourg. To this end, a reserve travel expenses support from the EU Parliament and use the services provided by the EU Parliament for journalists. For example, the recording studios in Strasbourg.
Of course, the various institutions have had now influence on the content and direction of this podcast.