Professor Simon Hix, Director of the Political Science and Political Economy Group at the London School of Economics, has some interesting points on the democratic deficit of the EU post-Lisbon.
In spite of an extension of the powers of the European Parliament and further involvement of national parliaments in the European decision making process, Simon Hix is not convinced that the EU has substantially improved the democratic deficit. Indeed, Hix defines the EU as an “enlightened despotism”, pointing out that although the EU in procedural terms could be defined as democratic (indirect election of the Commission, elected members of the Council, elected MEPs), its agenda is not up for debate, and there is therefore little room for Europeans to choose between competing visions of the Europe of the future.
In short form Hix concludes:
Although the EP acts like a “normal” parliament, voting along ideological rather than national lines, and indeed gives a fair representation of the European voters, the EP elections are to be considered a “second order national election”. I.e. voters do not express their views on Europe in EP elections, but instead express their views of national parties.
The strengthened involvement of national parliaments in Brussels’ decision making process in reality only strengthens the role of national governments, as governments more often than not dominate their parliaments and committees.
In particular, Hix takes to task the election of the Commission President Barosso (elected ‘like the Pope’!!), which took place without debate or real competition. Debate and discussion about policy choices Hix points out, are what democratic politics are all about.
