Need for “great figures”

The countdown to the elections to the European Parliament (EP) has begun. In the 27 member states 375 million electors will be called to the ballot box between 4 and 7 June to choose their representatives for the European Parliament. Brussels and Strasbourg are meanwhile launching a media campaign to raise citizens’ awareness about the forthcoming elections, placing the emphasis on two main themes: the role of popular participation to give democratic legitimacy to the EU institutions and build the “common home”; and the results achieved by the Union to the benefit of citizens themselves in the most varied spheres of life, from security to consumer protection, from the realization of infrastructures to culture.It’s enough to frequent the corridors of the European institutions, from the Parliament to the Commission, from the Council to the Central Bank, or chat with MEPs or EU bureaucrats, to realize that these elections are being regarded as an important test bed for the future of continental integration. In the meantime the parties represented in the EP are presenting their programmes and already fielding their candidates as potential President of the EP; at the national level, on the other hand, discussion is being focused on the electoral procedures to be applied to these European elections, which remain different from country to country: majority or proportional vote, with or without a blocking threshold, with or without preferential votes or closed lists. In this European election, which is being characterized as a kind of compendium of national elections, what seem to be lacking are mainly decisive unifying elements, which would give a “community”, i.e. an overriding European, value to the ballot. There is the usual problem of the lack of issues at the continental level in the pre-electoral debate. It’s true that almost four months remain before the vote, but given that all the previous elections, from 1979 onwards (when direct universal suffrage for the EP was first introduced), have been characterized by this paucity of European issues, it might be a good idea to ring the warning bell straight away. In this regard it should be said, in truth, that the major news stories in recent months have posed to the attention of public opinion some problems perceived with equal emotional intensity, and much the same degree of anxiety, throughout Europe, from Stockholm to Nicosia, from Lisbon to Vilnius: we may think of the economic crisis, the credit crunch, the energy emergency, security, immigration, climate change, or the conflicts in Georgia and the Middle East. “We need a cohesive and reactive Europe that is able to respond fast to the crisis”, said Nicolas Sarkozy and Angela Merkel in a joint statement on 8 February, holding up the prospect of the Franco-German economic plan being extended to the EU as a whole, and giving the impression of a growing conviction that “strength lies in union”, especially in response to the epochal transformations deriving from globalization. Much the same message was repeated by Mirek Topolanek, who holds the rotating Presidency of the EU Council, and José Manuel Barroso, President of the Commission, in calling for yet another extraordinary summit of the 27, to be held by the end of February.Just for this reason leaders of continental stature are needed. The French President and the German Chancellor are certainly big hitters in the political league table: but would they really be capable of presenting truly “European” policies? Do we have statesmen able to overcome narrow and selfish national interests and pursue the common good of Europe, while at the same time respecting the diversity of which Europe is composed? Do we have politicians inspired by shared values, rooted in the history of the continent and confirmed by their recognized relevance in our time? Also from the answer to these questions we could gauge the significance of the elections to the EP in June.