(24 October, 2023 – The Press Club Brussels)
Speakers
- Krisztina Hegedűs (Expert, European Parliament, S&D Group)
- Ivan Botoucharov (Expert, European Parliament, EPP Group)
Moderator
- Tamás Lattmann (General Manager, Centre for European Progression)
The aim of this C4EP-organized conference was to have an informal discussion on the upcoming elections and the challenges facing the European Union in terms of youth participation, political initiatives, and strategies to encourage greater involvement of young people in politics.
2024: Should we anticipate lower youth voter turnout?
In the last European elections in 2019, the overall turnout was 50.6%, the highest since 1994, with a record turnout in the under-25 age group. However, the question arises: what can we expect from the 2024 elections? Will the upward trend continue, or will the increase diminish? For Ivan Botoucharov of the EPP group in the European Parliament, the youth vote might be surprisingly positive for rather grim reasons. Current times are challenging for young people, marked by crises, wars, pandemics, heightened pressure and anxiety. Paradoxically, these negative factors have sparked increased interest in politics among young people. Ivan Botoucharov believes that young people recognize the importance of voting to make their voices heard during times of crisis, and it is crucial to sustain this motivation.
Krisztina Hegedűs suggested that the ongoing series of crises may offer hope, but it is essential to acknowledge that youth engagement in politics has been a longstanding issue that has not substantially improved over the years. Historically, young people have consistently had lower voter turnout compared to other demographics, and Krisztina does not foresee significant changes in the near future. She considers it a generational issue. Both speakers agreed on the significance of education concerning how the EU functions, the value of voting, and EU competences, especially in the context of the current crisis. Krisztina Hegedűs emphasized that young people need to be inspired by political figures, similar to the influence of figures like Barack Obama or Bernie Sanders in the United States. She jokingly added that more “Plux” would also motivate young people.
Ivan Botoucharov stressed that what motivated young people to vote in 2019 was their commitment to human rights and democracy. Young people are more idealistic and concerned with global issues, such as the environment, rather than fiscal matters. Thus, focusing on these issues is essential. Initiatives can be taken, especially in the realm of school education and the Erasmus program. The Erasmus program is crucial as it offers direct benefits to a broad range of young people, not just university students, leading to opportunities within non-governmental organizations, technical areas, etc. Both speakers concurred that educating young people on European matters is vital, as EU institutions can be complex and daunting. They underlined the need to help young people understand how the EU functions. Ivan Botoucharov highlighted the low representation of young people in institutions, with a (fun but) alarming fact that there are as many MEPs named Martin (6) as there are MEPs under 30 (6). He believes that young people should be more integrated into political parties and decision-making processes, ensuring their preferred issues receive greater attention.
Spitzenkandidat, Future of Europe Conference and others; Initiatives to rekindle interest in the EU, but are they effective?
The discussion then shifted to initiatives aimed at reigniting interest in the EU and its democratic processes. One such initiative is the Spitzenkandidat concept, first used in 2014 and subsequently in 2019. This “funky idea” as Tamás Lattman put it, aims to enhance democracy within the European Union by linking the outcome of European elections to the selection of the President of the European Commission. However, it is important to note that this process is not formally stipulated in the European treaties. While both speakers acknowledged the concept’s merits, they emphasized the need for addressing various questions and criticisms to make it more effective and transparent.
In addition to the Spitzenkandidat, a more recent initiative, the Conference on the Future of Europe, was discussed. This initiative aims to encourage citizens’ participation in discussions about the EU’s future, gathering their ideas and concerns to influence future decisions and reforms within the European Union. Both speakers underlined that this program is ambitious but requires effective follow-up. They noted that while the ideas raised in various conferences have been acknowledged, they have yet to be implemented and will not materialize before the next elections. Ivan Botoucharov stressed the importance of ensuring that European citizens feel integrated into the system. To achieve this, he highlighted the need to transform discussions within the commission into concrete actions and initiatives. He considers it essential for young people to vote and make their voices heard to effect change.
Between EU Empowerment and Federalism
Krisztina Hegedűs expressed her support for the infamous “F” word in the Brussels Bubble, advocating for the federalization of the European Union. She also believes that Member States will always require representation, addressing the importance of maintaining a balanced approach among institutions. Ivan Botoucharov shares the same federalist perspective, believing that more power should reside with the national capitals. He emphasized the need to allocate the appropriate levels of authority, whether regional or national, and suggested focusing on implementing what is necessary before addressing treaties. Additionally, he called for a greater focus on European-level media, as opposed to purely national media, to better communicate the EU’s activities and its relevance to citizens.
Both speakers agreed on the fact that an issue related to federalism is the lack of a common language within the EU. For example, can a Spitzenkandidat effectively communicate with all citizens given the linguistic diversity? This linguistic challenge raises serious questions, as interpreters may not fully convey the emotional nuances of the speaker’s message.
Tamás Lattmann’s final question concerned the topics discussed during the European election campaign. Popular election campaign topics fall outside the EU’s remit, as we saw with migration in 2019. How problematic is this? For Krisztina Hegedűs, while migration is always at the heart of the debate, the focus today is on climate change and carbon neutrality, and this will be part of the election campaign. The problem is that these issues are already being discussed within the EP. For Ivan Botoucharov, according to the Eurobarometer, issues such as immigration, human rights, democracy, and climate change are important to citizens, especially young people who are likely to vote. However, the European Parliament lacks the skills and resources to deal effectively with these issues. There is a gap between European citizens’ expectations of the European Parliament and its real capacity for action. This reinforces the argument for granting more sovereignty to European institutions. Action is essential to meet this challenge, especially as global pressures demand greater authority for the European Union.