On Thursday 14th May, Manchester University Students’ Union hosted a hustings event with candidates from the main parties running in the European Parliament elections for the North West for on 4th June.
Velida Pudic
With the European elections on the 4th of June many of us are trying to decide who to vote for. So what better way to decide than a hustings with (nearly) all the parties that are running! Well, er, actually no. The event didn’t enlighten us as to the EU’s future, what its underlying goal is or even help distinguish the parties running. But it certainly provided a few laughs and some memorable quotes…
Q: What is the most important unifying idea to maintain a united EU?
Perhaps the million dollar question. Yet if we were hoping for insight we were disappointed. The Conservative candidate mentioned single markets and industry but denied the EU was good for peace. There was a spark of hope when he mentioned the EU had become ‘Fortress Europe’ to those outside it but provided no suggestions on how to change.
The Liberal Democrat cited ‘working together’, green credentials and again, the single market. Poignantly, in what seemed to be a disagreement with the Tory, he mentioned how Europe must never again be a Europe ‘of refugees and bombed cities.’ The Greens added human rights but mentioned the need for accountability and environment sustainability to be at the heart of Europe. Labour, too, spoke of an economy based in the EU and how we must not become isolationist. To withdraw from the EU would result in millions of lost jobs.
Predictably, the UKIP candidate started with ‘What’s good about the EU? Not a lot!’ With seemingly no worry about sounding like the front page of the Daily Mail he ranted on about our rights being undermined (at this point pulling out a leaflet on how the EU will spy on us through our iPods), Britain becoming less competitive and how money on membership is a ‘waste’ that could pay for 2000 nurses a year.
So the words ‘peace’, ‘markets’, ‘unity’ and ‘environment’ were floating about but it seemed the question had not been answered…
‘Why can’t you answer my question!? What is the single unifying concept to unite Europe? It’s not particularly hard!’ shouted an exasperated audience member to smatterings of applause from the crowd.
The Lib Dem candidate simply replied, ‘the Treaty, it’s all enshrined in there.’ ‘Freedom and sustainability.’ Those are, apparently, the goals.
Q: How do you make the EU more accountable? And UKIP, how would we maintain influence if we withdrew?
The Lib Dem proposed we must have an directly elected executive.
UKIP tried to assert that the UK would still be a powerful force even if we withdrew. He cited the example of the USA’s influence on whether they trade with Europe in metric or imperial measures…
But, surely we have bigger issues to worry about than units..?
Q: Will the British economy be better off in or out of Europe?
Sure enough, the next question dealt with one of Britain’s biggest worries, the economy.
The Conservative said it wasn’t a case of ‘in or out’ of Europe, rather ‘in or out of the euro zone.’ The Irish economy, he said, has been devastated by joining the Euro and losing that freedom to control their interest rates.
At this point the Chair intervened with a question on MEP’s expenses, with groans emitting from the crowd.
Labour agreed with the crowd saying there was too much talk on expenses but still pointing out that all Labour MEPs have submitted all their receipts to a scrutiny committee, which other parties have failed to do. Green agreed that expenses should only be allowed for appropriate use and adding that the move from Brussels to Strasbourg is a waste of money. She did point out that we should be more interested in sustainability indicators rather than GDP. The Lib Dem pointed out that he had blown the whistle on one MEP in particular in relation to expenses, receiving much applause from the audience. UKIP merely said we should be spending money on the UK and not on the EU.
But it seems, like the media, we couldn’t lay the issue of expenses to rest…
Q: Do you agree with Stephen Fry that expenses are media nonsense?
The Conservative asserted his moral values. Of course it wasn’t nonsense! The expenses system must be utterly transparent! The Lib Dem intervened at this point with the words:
‘What do I care about more? The money spent on a moat or the money spent financing an illegal war?’ which perhaps gained the loudest applause of the evening.
That done with we moved onto other issues. With the worrying chance of apathy and extremists helping the BNP get into power it seems the recent zeitgeist has been ‘Vote for anyone but the BNP.’ Hence the next question…
Q: What’s more important: campaigning against the BNP or advocating your own agenda?
The Green candidate said that first and foremost they want people to believe in Green. However it is important to get the vote out as the BNP in power would be a ‘complete disaster.’ But she didn’t stop there. Oh no. In a somewhat controversial move, she claimed that there could be nothing worse for women and ethnic minorities than a BNP MEP and then a Tory government in power. Met with laughter, applause and some boos, another question was quickly fired from a female audience member. ‘I’m an ethnic minority and planning to vote Tory. Isn’t it political immaturity to compare the Conservatives and the BNP?’
The Conservative agreed it was a cheap shot. He said parties should promote their own agenda. He made an interesting point that we shouldn’t be talking about the BNP too much. ‘They aren’t a very rich party’ and so in a sense to talk about them is to give them free publicity.
Q: What measures can we use to stop big businesses having so much influence on the EU?
Most of the candidates met this with the same answer. Transparency, transparency, transparency. (Could this be the ‘political buzz word’ of the economic crisis!?)
Yet UKIP had a somewhat interesting take on it… in a tone of disgust he described how the EU are funding… charities. What a disgrace! Charities are getting plenty of money from the EU. How dare they badger us on the street!? Silence spread across the room. Then confusion. Whispers of ‘But isn’t that a good thing..?’ and ‘Charities aren’t businesses…’ permeated the air.
We moved on.
Q: Why has Labour backtracked on a referendum on the constitution and Tories backtracked on withdrawing from the European People’s Party?
Labour denied it was a constitution. It’s a treaty! It’s different! The Lib Dem, in a brave move, asked the audience whether anyone actually had read the Lisbon Treaty. How can we have a vote when the majority of voters will not have read it? The Conservative insisted withdrawal from EPP. UKIP insisted we must have a referendum! We must say no! We’ll have no control over our own laws!
We moved on.
Q: Will these elections be more a referendum on the current government rather than an actual vote on Europe?
The Conservative agreed. Let’s be honest, he said, this isn’t just going to be about Europe. The Lib Dem agreed, saying it will be more a question on whether we like the government and the EU in general than choices about the European Parliament. Which is worrying, he points out, as ‘there is power to do a lot more in the EU’ than in our domestic parliament. The Green wishes there was more media coverage on Europe in the run up to elections rather than coverage on expenses. So, all were in agreement that people would see this more as a vote on the government than on Europe. But apart form a mention of media coverage by the Green, no one gave any real reason as to how we or they can change that.
Q: What’s your stance on expansion, particularly the Balkans?
Again replies were the same, the EU should expand, according to stringent human rights criteria. ‘The Balkans are small and manageable’ said the Lib Dem. UKIP provided by far the most interesting, if factually incorrect, answer. The countries we would be expanding into have dangerous borders and if we expand it means we would be bringing our borders closer to danger..!
Finally, we finished with a question on whether the EU is wasting time on ‘health and safety’ and ‘nanny state’ legislation.
As the Lib Dem pointed out there is much confusion with who provides this legislation and a lot of it is not actually the EU. UKIP said what was more annoying was that the European Court of Human Rights was controlling our law. (People are allowed to appeal potentially unfair trial decisions!? Scandalous!) Groans from the crowd ensued until, thankfully, the Lib Dem reminded him that he’d got his courts mixed up, it was the ECJ he was talking about…
The last point really sums it up. There is so much confusion about the EU. What it does. Why it’s good. What the next steps are. Unfortunately, we havn’t had an answer here. Sure, words like ‘peace’, ‘unity’ , ‘economy’ were continuously used. But if anything, UK MEPs and candidates should be focusing on promoting to the population why exactly the EU is necessary and finding clear goals to work on to make it a more United Europe.
The candidates that attended the event were:
Brian Boag for the Labour Party
Michael McManus for UKIP
Ruth Bergan for the Green Party
Chris Davies for the Liberal Democrats
Alex Williams for the Conservative Party
If you are not registered to vote, you have until 19th May to do so: http://www.aboutmyvote.co.uk/
seriously, this blog is nice . I think im gonna stick around and read about 9 more of your posts. Hope all is well