Understanding the Formation and Actions of Eurosceptic Groups in the European Parliament: Pragmatism, Principles and Publicity

Richard Whitaker,Philip Lynch

doi:10.1017/gov.2013.40

Abstract

This article assesses why Eurosceptic national parties form groups in the European Parliament and examines in what ways two of these groups – the European Conservatives and Reformists and Europe of Freedom and Democracy – operate in the European Parliament. It draws on interviews with politicians and group officials, roll-call votes and expert judgement data. We look at the group formation process with a focus on the British Conservatives and UK Independence Party and find that the European Conservatives and Reformists group was created with a mixture of policy-seeking and party-management aims. The UK Independence Party's interest in the Europe of Freedom and Democracy group is largely on the basis of the group's provision of distinct practical advantages, such as resources for political campaigns. We provide evidence that hard Eurosceptic and regionalist niche parties in the European Parliament struggle to agree with each other in roll-call votes on a range of subjects. Finally, we show that the hard and soft Eurosceptic parties studied here go about policy-seeking in different ways in the European Parliament in line with their differing principles on the integration process.

Highlights

What factors explain the formation of the European Conservatives and Reformists (ECR) and Europe of Freedom and Democracy (EFD) and are these factors specific to groups that are Eurosceptic in outlook? This section answers these questions, drawing heavily on interviews conducted by the authors
Roll-call voting data, expert judgements, information on MEPs’ activities and some brief legislative case studies, this paper has demonstrated the different approaches that Eurosceptic parties and groups take to operating within the European Parliament (EP)
Views within the EFD are wideranging on the European Union (EU) integration dimension, its diversity is comparatively limited in left-right terms

Summary

Theories of group formation and activities in the European Parliament

Research on parties in the EP suggests a number of motivations for forming party groups. McElroy and Benoit (2010) test a policy congruence theory in which national parties will join groups that are closest to their own position on their most salient policy dimensions. These parties’ focus on national or regional autonomy and identity means that such concerns may be important for them when deciding how to vote in the EP Such parties will be less likely to compromise on policy positions than their mainstream counterparts on the basis that they risk losing their core support if they moderate policy (Adams et al 2006), and because the organization of niche parties tends to favour influence for activists (Ezrow et al 2011; Dumont and Bäck 2006). As the two largest parties in the EFD differ in terms of their Euroscepticism, we hypothesise that there will be differences in their behaviour with the Lega Nord involving themselves much more in the details of the EP’s legislative activities We test these expectations by looking at several aspects of Eurosceptic parties’ approach to operating in the EP: forming groups, voting and engagement with legislative processes. While UKIP were part of I/D’s forerunner in the fifth term, Europe of Democracies and Diversities (EDD), they only had three MEPs at the time, meaning they were in a rather weaker position with regard to group formation

Forming the ECR and EFD groups

Conclusion

Findings

Europe of Freedom and