Last update on 16 July. This page will no longer be updated.
National impact
Click on the national flags below for details on the impact of the European election results on the national political scene from Burson-Marsteller’s network of offices across Europe.
There was low interest in the European elections among German voters and consequently an historically low voter turnout of 43%. As in the past, campaigns mostly focused on national issues and national politicians. While the Christian Democrats (CDU), for instance, heavily advertised posters of the German Chancellor Angela Merkel, the Social Democrats (SPD) ran a negative campaign closely related to national political issues.
Both governing parties can hardly spin these election results as a positive and affirmative acknowledgment of their government activities. While the Christian Democrats clearly lost votes compared to the 2004 elections, they remain the biggest German delegation in the European Parliament. The Social Democrats received their worst result in a nation-wide election since WW II. Even though the party has advocated massive government help for troubled companies to save jobs, voters did not reward this policy.
The trend towards stronger small parties at the expense of the two big parties seems to continue: The Green Party secured 12.1%, followed by the Liberals (11.0%) and the Left Party (7.5%). The trend seen elsewhere in Europe towards right-wing or anti-EU parties cannot be seen in Germany.
Most political observers have scrutinized the elections with regard to potential signals for the upcoming elections to the German Bundestag in September. The central question will be whether results will require the conservatives (CDU/CSU) and the Social Democrats (SPD) to renew their unloved ‘Grand Coalition’ (in place since 2005) or whether the CDU/CSU will be able to form a coalition with the market-oriented Liberals (FDP).
However, interpreting the results as a voter preference for a conservative-liberal coalition at national level would, in fact, be too early to declare.
Click here for more information on Burson-Marsteller Berlin’s public affairs practice.
Spain had a turnout of 46%, above the European average, but nevertheless, interest in the European elections among Spanish voters is historically lower than the national elections (last year, there was 75% participation in the general election).
The campaign was mainly focused on national issues and the economic situation, although the governing Socialist party (PSOE) tried to focus the campaign on Europe, since the local situation is even worse, in economic terms, than the rest of the EU.
With a message focussed on the economic disaster (Spain has an unemployment rate of 18% at moment), the conservative Popular Party (PP) won the European elections in Spain, obtaining about 3.75% more of the popular vote than the Socialist party, and two more seats than PSOE in the new European Parliament . This was the first victory for PP in the last nine years, with Socialist Prime Minister José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero paying the price of the recession.
The PP victory came in spite of the involvement of party members in several corruption scandals in Madrid and Valencia. These scandals did not seem to matter to electors in those regions, where the PP achieved even better results. It seems that stereotypes are difficult to remove: corruption and scandals didn’t affect results in Spain (or Italy), in the way they did in the UK, for example.
The PP can be happy with its win, and the pressure on the leadership of Mariano Rajoy has been lifted, at least for now. However, it is difficult for them to celebrate the fact that their share of the vote has increased by only one percentage point since 2004, from 41.21% to 42.24%.
The government can also be reasonably happy that their defeat was no greater, with a 5% fall in the vote and the loss of four seats. In comparison to other countries, this was a solid result, as the economic crisis hit all the governments across Europe in the poll.
Spain will take up the EU Presidency during the first semester of 2010 and the government believes that this will be an opportunity to lead the economic recovery and reinforce the EU and Spain’s relationship with Obama administration.
Click here for more information on Burson-Marsteller Madrid’s public affairs practice.
In comparison to the rest of the EU, Italy has always been characterised by a high voting turnout. However, in this year’s European elections only 67% of Italian citizens voted, six per cent less than in the 2004 elections. This was despite the fact that most cities combined the EU polls with the administrative elections. Compared to last year’s national elections, the number of valid votes fell by almost 5.9 million (a drop of 16 percentage points).
As is often the case in European elections, voters turned to some extent to smaller parties such as the Northern League (LN – 10% of the vote), Italy of Values (IdV – 8%) and Union of the Centre (UdC – 6,51%). Each party secured a good number of MEPs. The performances of the LN and IDV were particularly outstanding. The NL gained two percentage points compared to the national elections of last year and 5,2 points in comparison to the 2004 European elections. This growth came as a result of the support of many voters in some of the central regions of Italy. Meanwhile the IdV doubled its score of last year and increased its share of the vote by six percentage points compared to the 2004 European vote.
A reform of the electoral system that introduced a minimum threshold of 4% prevented some parties, mainly on the extreme left and extreme right, from gaining representation at European level. Former communists, who shared a list with the Greens and radicals, did not reach the threshold. A right-wing coalition also fell short.
The PDL remained the leading party even though it lost nearly two percentage points in comparison to last year. It had the best performance of governing parties in Europe,and although it fell below the 40% mark that it had been expected to reach by some commentators, it widened the gap between it and the PD (see graph below). The PD itself will regroup at a new Congress scheduled for October. The European elections represented a test for the party, which it passed to some extent: although performed worse than last year, it did better than expected.
The electoral campaign, which started quite late (at the beginning of May), did not focus on EU-related issues, but was mainly characterised by scandals, personal attacks and gossip, widely publicised by the media both at national and international level. According to many observers, the attention given to those kinds of topics - instead of discussing the real problems of the country - was probably one of the main causes of dissatisfaction among citizens and, subsequently, of absenteeism at the polls.
Click here for more information on Burson-Marsteller Rome’s public affairs practice.
There was significantly low level of interest in the European elections among Greek voters and consequently an all-time high in the abstention level (48%). This was the first significant new development in these elections, something that took exit polls by surprise.
As in the past, campaigns focused mainly on national issues and national politicians, and the European elections turned into a national battlefield, mainly between the two biggest parties: the governing New Democracy party (Nea Dimokratia) and the socialist opposition party, PASOK.
Another significant development was the dramatic trend towards smaller parties at the expense of the two big parties, who managed to obtain only 69% of the vote (back to the levels of the 1994 and 1999 European elections).
PASOK’s win (with a 4.35% percentage point advantage over New Democracy) sent a clear signal of discontent to the Government, which now needs to act fast to manage two big problems: firstly, its image, damaged through a series of scandals; and secondly, the necessary structural reforms to make up the difference between the parties before the forthcoming national elections. At the moment, nobody really knows the exact time of these elections, and the Government still has a further two years before the constitutional end of its term in office. However in March 2010 there will be presidential elections, which are seen as the latest point at which to call national elections. As a result, most analysts expect the national elections to take place at any time from September 2009.
Of the other parties in the European elections, the Communist party (KKE) remained in a steady third position. However, there was a significant leap forward for LAOS, an extreme right party, and a fall for SYRIZA, a smaller, left-wing coalition party. A series of other minor parties gained an impressive cumulative total of 7% of the vote, another remarkable outcome. One in three of New Democracy voters was attracted by these parties.
The ‘Green Ecologists’ phenomenon lost momentum during the campaign (principally due to a lack of media exposure) and the promising signs at the beginning of the pre-election period translated into only one seat in the European Parliament. However, if they are measured cumulatively with the other ‘ecologist’ parties they seem to have underlined the ecologically activist dimension of their followers during these elections.
Actually, as Dimitri A. Mavros, CEO of MRB Hellas (the leading opinion poll and research agency in Greece) stated in his article in the Greek newspaper Eleftheros Typos after the elections: “The message of these elections was the voters’ activist behaviour: through abstention, stating disappointment against the way the current party political system is functioning; through LAOS as an expression of internal protest within New Democracy; through the Ecologists, who provided an outlet for a plea for a better quality of life; and – finally - through the even more unforeseen choice by voters in favour of significantly smaller parties”.
Click here for more information on Advocate Burson-Marsteller’s public affairs practice.
After a month of revelations over MPs’ expenses, the European Parliament Elections were held at a low point for mainstream political parties in the UK. The brunt of this growing public anger and distrust was directed at the UK’s governing Labour Party, which saw some of the worst results in its history and left the party in the most vulnerable position it has been in for decades. This defeat was compounded by the fact that the European poll was held on the same day as elections for a number of English local authorities. This resulted in Labour losing control of its last remaining county councils in England, with the Conservatives taking control of Lancashire, Staffordshire, Derbyshire and Nottinghamshire.
As the European votes were counted three days later after the close of the polls in the rest of Europe, the pain was stretched out for Labour. The Party pushed into third place behind the UK Independence Party (UKIP) after taking just 15.7% of the popular vote. The vote share of the other parties was only marginally up, but the collapse of the Labour vote led to the worst results for the party in any election since the Second World War. Even in the Labour ‘heartlands’, traditional voters appeared unwilling to cast their ballot in these elections and so the party lost seats to the Conservatives, UKIP, the Liberal Democrats and, most controversially, the far-right, nationalist British National Party. Both the North West and Yorkshire & Humber will now be represented by a BNP member in the European Parliament - by party leader Nick Griffin and former National Front leader Andrew Brons respectively. In Scotland, Labour was beaten by the Scottish National Party (SNP) for the first time in a UK-wide election; in Wales, Labour was beaten into second place by the Tories for the first time since 1918; and in the county of Cornwall, in the South-West region, Labour polled sixth – beaten by a Cornish nationalist party.
As the scale of the electoral hammering became clear, the position of the Prime Minister, Gordon Brown, looked increasingly untenable and almost inspired a full-scale rebellion in the (Westminster) Parliamentary Labour Party (PLP). In an effort to shore up his position and reassert his authority, the Prime Minister carried out a Cabinet reshuffle that took place against the background of a series of resignations by ministers, some of whom criticised his leadership style or requested the Prime Minister’s own resignation.
Nevertheless, Gordon Brown managed to survive a crucial meeting of the PLP, having secured the support of most senior ministers (including the former EU Trade Commissioner, Peter Mandelson) in order to hold onto to office and the leadership of the Party. Many Labour MPs will breathe a sigh of relief that Mr Brown’s survival has bought them time and seen off the threat of an immediate General Election in which a large number of them are likely to lose their jobs. However, there are many who fear that Mr Brown will lead Labour to a catastrophic defeat in 2010.
Many in Brussels will be relieved to see off the immediate threat that a Conservative government in the UK would pose to the Lisbon Treaty: the Tories’ leader, David Cameron, continues to promise to hold a referendum on the issue and campaign for a no vote. However, with the prospects of a snap 2009 General Election now gone, the Conservative position on the Lisbon Treaty is looking more convoluted with Kenneth Clarke, a senior Conservative MP and Europhile, stating that if (or when) the party takes power next year, it would not reopen the Lisbon Treaty if the text has already been ratified and has entered into force.
Click here for more information on Burson-Marsteller London’s public affairs practice.
The Czech Republic had voter turnout of 28% in the European elections. The personal and emotional campaigns of the two leading rival political parties, the ODS (Civic Democrats) and the CSSD (Czech Social Democratic Party), based on negative portrayals of their political opponents, failed to mobilise voters and in some ways signal the limitations of political marketing in the absence of substantial European policy topics. While the left-of-centre CSSD, which initiated the collapse of the government during the Czech Presidency, failed to offer any solutions to voters, the outgoing right-wing ODS at least showed a more rational approach towards the global economic crisis.
The ODS won the elections to European Parliament with 31.5% of the vote, followed by the CSSD (22.4%), the Communist Party (KSCM, 14.2%) and the Christian Democrats (KDU-CSL, 7.7%). These results follow the general European trend; however, the Green Party (SZ) did not benefit from the rise in the ecologist vote, failing to gain any seats in the new Parliament. This was mainly due to an ideological split within the party leadership, which led to the creation of a new Democratic Green Party.
If the parliamentary elections, to be held in October, produce similar results, it would mean the same distribution of forces as in the right wing coalition government before its fall. However, trying to guess the results of the parliamentary elections based on the European poll has several limitations: the ODS addresses mainly voters that are interested in the European Union and are more diligent about voting in the EP elections; meanwhile the CSSD claims that its programme is mainly oriented towards national-based policies. So while for the latter the challenge will be to get as many of its sympathizers as possible to come out to vote in the autumn, the ODS may see hope in the 10% of votes for the small and fragmented parties that did not gain representation in the European Parliament, and which have a more liberal outlook.
Click here for more information on Donath-Burson-Marsteller’s public affairs practice.
Despite moving against the European trend and increasing voter turnout by 2.6% (compared to 2004), Slovakia once again had the lowest voter turnout in the EU, with 20% of voters going to the polls.
More information about European institutions and a more visible campaign failed to significantly increase the turnout and in fact these efforts may have been counteracted by recent corruption scandals involving the ruling coalition (some of which had European dimension). The candidate preference votes shook up the results within the parties, causing four changes in the party candidate list leadership compared to 1 in 2004. The campaigns were marked by national themes and a low level of confrontation.
The leftist SMER won the elections in Slovakia with 32.0% (five seats), followed by the centre-right Democratic and Christian Union (SDKU-DS, 17.0%), the Hungarian Coalition Party (SMK, 11.3%), Christian Democrats (KDH, 10.9%), LS-HZDS (9.0%) and the nationalist SNS (5.6%).
When we translate the national results into the European party groups, although a winner, SMER has not, in fact, managed to defeat the right-wing parties. These parties gained a total of six seats (SDKU-DS, SMK and KDH will be joining the EPP). Nevertheless, compared to the 2004 elections, SMER brings the Socialists and Democrats two extra seats.
At a national level, SMER seems to have confirmed its leadership in terms of voter preference, however, the party also shows the biggest difference between the national preferences (40-45% of the vote) and those in the European Parliament elections (32%). This also means that it may be easier for the party to mobilise voters on national topics in parliamentary elections than on European topics in the European elections.
The centre-right parties show similar results compared to the 2004 elections. The medium-size parties, such as SMK or KDH, have confirmed that they have a solid core vote in face of a low voter turnout. The centre-right SDKU, which gained almost the same number of seats as in 2004, has been and will be under considerable pressure from a right-wing newcomer, SaS, in the parliamentary elections in summer 2010.
The LS-HZDS, led by Vladimir Meciar, seems to be on the decline, having suffered the highest loss of seats compared to 2004 elections.
The European election results, though coming from a low turnout, may offer possible hints for the coalitions to be formed after the parliamentary elections. Most analysts do not foresee the return of a right-wing coalition just yet, and instead favour the possibility of SMER forming a coalition with a smaller party of similar orientation.
Click here for more information on Donath-Burson-Marsteller’s public affairs practice.
In Finland, voter turnout was down slightly to 40.2% from 41.1% in 2004. It varied in different areas, which partially explains the results in Finland. In bigger cities and Swedish-speaking municipalities voter turnout was higher than in sparsely populated areas.
‘True Finns’ was the biggest winner, the party gaining nearly one in ten votes. In the last EU elections they received less than one per cent of the vote. True Finns is an Eurosceptic party that is critical of immigration, and has gained significant support in recent years. Timo Soini, the chairman of the party, got most of the True Finns’ votes. Mr Soini is a very popular and well-known politician and his candidacy is the main reason for the party’s victory. The Greens were also big winners as they gained a second seat in the European Parliament.
As in most European countries, the Left suffered in these elections. The Left Alliance lost their only seat and the electoral defeat led to the resignation of Martti Korhonen, the party chairman. The Social Democrats also lost one of their three seats. The defeat of the left is rather exceptional as an economic downturn usually brings support for the leftist parties.
The Christian Democrats got fewer votes than the Left Alliance, but the election alliance with True Finns helped them win a seat. The moderate conservatives of the National Coalition Party increased their share of votes, but still lost one of their four seats - as did the Centre Party. The Centre Party voters are mostly located in the smaller municipalities, which had a very low voter turnout. The low turnout most likely benefited the Swedish People’s Party, who kept their seat in the European Parliament (participation was higher in the Swedish speaking municipalities than the national average).
Click here for more information on Pohjoisranta-Burson-Marsteller’s public affairs practice.
On 7 June European Parliamentary elections were held in Austria for the third time since the country’s EU accession in 1995. The EU elections brought results that were to some extent surprising, and have shaken the political landscape in Austria widely. Since the election campaigns hardly touched upon European issues, it was foreseeable that the voters’ decisions would only be little influenced by topics of vital importance to the EU. Instead the majority of Austrians cast their vote on the national performance of parties.
The final election result clearly demonstrated Austrian skepticism towards the EU by bringing landslide victories for both the Hans-Peter Martin List, a movement that is critical of the EU, and the right-wing Freedom Party (FPÖ). The governing parties, the Social Democrats (SPÖ) and the People’s Party (ÖVP) lost decisively. Having already reached an historic low, the SPÖ suffered substantial losses of almost ten percentage points in comparison to the elections in 2004.
Although the voter turnout was expected to be relatively low, the 45.97% percentage rate was a slight increase in comparison to the elections in 2004.
The final results in detail can be seen in the chart below. With only 4.58 per cent the former party of Jorg Haider, the BZÖ, failed to enter the European Parliament. If and when the Lisbon treaty enters into force, the BZÖ would hold one seat in the assembly.
Despite major losses for the ÖVP, the party was declared to be the real winner of the elections and will aim to take the chancellorship at the next national elections in 2013. Generally speaking the results of the EU elections were considered by political parties in Austria as an indicator for the outcome of the forthcoming provincial elections, which are due to be held in autumn this year, as well as elections in the capital, Vienna, next year.
Click here for more information on Hochegger|Com-Burson-Marsteller’s public affairs practice in Austria.
Denmark had a turnout of about 60%, an historic high for European Parliament elections. However, this figure was highly influenced by the fact that the election coincided with a referendum on a change in the constitution that would grant equal succession rights to male and female members of the royal family. As this referendum required a turnour of at least 40% to be valid, it did indeed have a mobilising effect on the turnout.
The European election campaign was to some degree overshadowed by constitutional issues and not many candidates managed to get through to the broader public until the final week of campaigning. In fact, most European debates centred on voter attitudes (and apathy) towards the EU, rather than on a debate of the different candidates’ views on key issues.
The largest party, the Social Democrats, was able to get the largest number of candidates elected and 21.5% of the vote. However, it was a major setback compared to the last European Parliament election, when Poul Nyrup Rasmussen, a former Danish prime minister of Denmark, won a record high number of personal votes. The votes lost by the Social Democrats were divided between the other left-wing parties, and the Socialist Peoples’ Party won an extra seat, with 15.6% of the votes. The Liberal Party (Venstre), currently in government, also had a disappointing election, managing to win only three seats (and 20.2% of the vote). The biggest winner of the election was the lead candidate from the Danish People Party (a right-wing party that supports the government) who managed almost single-handedly to win 15.3% of the vote and two seats for the party.
The main conclusion that can be drawn from this election is that Euroscepticism is finding new ground in the Danish political landscape. Traditionally a left-wing phenomenon, the ‘healthy’ skepticism has now spread to most parties.
Click here for more information on Burson-Marsteller Copenhagen’s public affairs practice.
In France, the results of the European elections were surprising and seen by some commentators as the end of traditional political balance (although this analysis must be put into perspective, given the very high level of abstention (59.4%) and the specific character of European elections compared to national elections).
Regarding the campaign, it is interesting to notice that only the Greens centered their campaign on European issues. The other political parties and leaders focused on national issues: the campaign led by the Socialist Party (PS) and the MODEM (a centrist party) turned into systematic criticism of Nicolas Sarkozy.
There are four things to stress about the results of the European elections in France:
1. The large victory of the Presidential political party (UMP – EPP)
For the first time since 1979, the party of the sitting French President won the elections (with 27.87% of votes cast and 29 MEPs). Mr Sarkozy now benefits from a renewed legitimacy. This score may be explained by:
- the recognised success of the French Presidency of the European Union (including its management of the Georgian conflict and of the financial crisis, and the climate and energy package);
- the close involvement of Mr Sarkozy in the campaign; and
- the appointment of pro-European personalities to lead the party lists in the different regions (including Joseph Daul, Françoise Grossetête and Michel Barnier).
2. The breakthrough of the Greens
After years of difficulties for the French Greens, Daniel Cohn-Bendit succeeded in his strategy of gathering very different people – including a judge (Eva Joly) and an anti-globalisation campaigner (José Bové) – around a European project. The Greens got more than 16% of the vote and finished in second position in large cities (such as Paris, Lyon, and Bordeaux). That was a largely unforeseen victory. Few weeks before, opinion polls suggested a probable score of 8-10%. This major scale success may be explained by:
- a European-centered campaign;
- a growing awareness of environmental issues in France, especially in the cities, following the Grenelle de l’Environnement (a multi-party and multi-stakeholder Round Table on green issues); and
- the personality of Mr Cohn-Bendit and the choice of his team: the legitimacy embodied by Ms Joly, plus Yannick Jadot from Greenpeace and Mr Bové and the Confédération Paysanne.
3. The downfall of the Socialist Party
The Socialist Party (PS), the main opposition party in France, lost 17 seats at these elections. It gained only 16.48% of the votes (and there was only 35,000 votes’ difference between PS and the Greens). Since the presidential elections of 2007, the PS has faced many difficulties to maintain a unified front. Ségolène Royal and Martine Aubry (the leader or ‘first secretary’ of the party) continue to oppose each other on the major economic, international and social issues.
So, this bad score is confirmation of the disaffection of the French voters with the PS, which is most often viewed as a battlefield for egos rather than a genuinely creative opposition party.
4. Other lessons from the polls
Like in other European countries, there was significantly low interest in the European elections among the French voters (59.4% of abstention).
The extreme right National Front party remains weak, with only three seats (the same as during the previous legislature), while extreme-left parties stood up quite well. The communist and anticapitalist parties collectively gained around 10% of the vote.
The bad score of the MODEM, the centrist party led by François Bayrou, is surprising. It gained 8% of the vote instead of 12-14% that had been predicted. This can be explained by:
- the loss of control on the part of Mr Bayrou during a TV debate with Mr Cohn-Bendit three days before the vote, when Mr Bayrou implicitly evoked an old story of allegations of pedophilia formulated against Mr Cohn-Bendit many years ago. Mr Bayrou’s behaviour was denounced by all political leaders; and
- o a nationally-centred campaign. Traditionally, MODEM is viewed as the most pro-European political party in France. For these elections, Mr Bayrou focused on attacking Mr Sarkozy, and this message was not well received by voters, who opted for the Greens.
Click here for more information on the Burson-Marsteller Paris public affairs practice.
The 2009 European elections were the second time Poles had elected their European representatives, after Polish entry to the European Union in 2004. At stake were 50 seats in the European Parliament (EP), but the significance of the elections went beyond the actual vote itself. For each of the parties competing the elections, and especially Civic Platform (PO) and Law and Justice (PiS), the poll was seen as a test of the political strategy each had pursued after the domestic parliamentary elections of 2007, and a lead indicator of how the parties might perform in the cycle of local, Presidential and parliamentary elections over the upcoming two years.
The results themselves broadly reflected the trends of the national opinion polls of the previous year, showing a continued strong lead of the ruling Civic Platform (PO) party, with 44% of the vote, followed by the main opposition Law and Justice (PiS) party with 27%. The only other two parties to enter the EP were the post-communist Democratic Left Alliance (SLD) with 12% of the vote, and the junior governmental coalition partner of the PO, the Polish Peasant Party (PSL) with 6% of the vote.
These percentages translated into 25 seats in the EP for PO, 15 seats for PiS, seven for the SLD and three for PSL. In the case of the first three parties, these numbers represent an increase in relation to the seats held in 2004, and thus can on the surface be seen as a relative success for each of them.
Read more: click here for CEC Government Relations’ review of the results of the Polish elections to the European Parliament. It contains a detailed profile of each new Polish MEP, as well as a detailed analysis by Marek Matraszek, Chairman of CEC in Poland, of the background to the results and their implications for both Poland’s internal political scene as well as the balance of forces in the new European Parliament.
Click here for more information on CEC Government Relations.