Ms Suzanne Lynch:

I will touch on some of the same issues. I will deal with a couple of themes and then move to a broader analysis.
One could see the turn-out in a positive light. It is the first time that the year-on-year decline has been reversed. It has stabilised at 43%. There is a huge disparity between countries such as Belgium, where I voted, and where 90% of people vote, and Slovakia where the turn-out was 13%. There is a trend for quite high votes in the larger countries such as France and Germany, whereas the central and east European countries such as the Czech Republic and Slovenia are down at 20%. Why has the European Parliament not brought these countries, which acceded in the past ten years, along?
The performance of the far right and far left is used as a term to mask greater diversity. There are extremely xenophobic parties such as Jobbik in Hungary and Golden Dawn in Greece and the more moderate parties such as the United Kingdom Independence Party, UKIP, in Britain which is regarded as less extreme than the British National Party. It is true that the European People's Party, EPP, and the Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats, S&D, are still the largest parties but we cannot underestimate the success of these anti-establishment parties. Their strong vote in large founder member countries such as France and Britain means they will have more MEPs which will change the hue of the parliament. It is significant that Marine Le Pen's party, which is anti-European and wants to exit the euro, topped the poll in France, traditionally the most federalist and pro-European country and one which pushed the euro.
The main impact will be felt nationally because the success of the political fringes may force mainstream parties to change their policies somewhat, for example, the British Conservative party is hardening its Eurosceptic stance and anti-immigration policy because of UKIP's rise and because it is losing voters to UKIP. The same is happening in France. President François Hollande is quite strong on anti-immigration policy but arguably if the National Front was not succeeding he might not have been as strong on that issue.
This will solidify consensus among the EPP and S&D members. I have heard people say off the record that there is a concerted move in the parliament to isolate some of these extreme parties. That will encourage the S&D and EPP to work together more. We will know more about the political groupings next week but the fact that Marine Le Pen and Mr. Wilders did not get enough support from the seven countries to form a group is significant. This raises the broader question of how much power the European Parliament really has. We have heard how since the Lisbon treaty in 2009 the European Parliament has gained much more power but the power to initiate legislation still resides with the Commission. The member states have more power through the Council formation. One of the ironies of contemporary history is that the period since 2009, when the parliament should have come into its own, coincided with the bailouts and the eurozone crisis when all the decisions were made at Council and Commission level. The European Parliament had no part in any of the decisions on the Greek and Irish bailouts. The Commission and Council were actively involved in the troika programmes. Maybe now that the eurozone crisis has calmed down a bit the media will take more interest in the parliament and there will be more activity in the parliament when the EU is out of crisis management mode.
One of the outcomes of the elections last month has been the debate about the election of the European Commission President. This did not really engage the public before the elections but it has now become very divisive and quite serious. The Taoiseach is travelling to the summit of EU leaders on Thursday. It now looks likely that Jean-Claude Juncker will be appointed. The debate arose over the so-called spitzenkandidatsystem. The political groups argue that they interpret a clause in the Lisbon treaty, to the effect that the Council must take account of the elections, as meaning that each party must nominate a candidate and the person with the most votes wins. Britain has taken a very strong stance on this. Traditionally, it has a history of blocking or vetoing European Commission Presidents. The significance this time is that if it goes with Mr. Juncker it will set a precedent and that will continue from now on. Many people from the Parliament say this is a good way to address the democratic deficit between voters and the institutions that represent them. That raises the question of where does or should power reside in the European Union. Should it reside in the European Parliament, the only directly elected institution? Or should it reside in the European Council? The battle is taking place this week in Brussels. Britain is very strongly opposed to the parliament getting more power. It believes it does not have a mandate because the election turn-out is so low. It feels strongly that the job of the European Commission President should not be politicised and that if the parliament gets involved that will politicise a role that should be neutral. Many see the European Commission as a kind of civil service. There are serious debates going on this week in Brussels.
The context for the debate about the EU job that happens every five years has changed because there will probably be a referendum on EU membership in Britain in the next few years. In the past few days there have been hints that the Conservative Party may even campaign for a "Yes" vote to leave the EU after this. There is a danger that this issue of the appointment of the next Commission President will alienate Britain and British voters. It has featured very heavily in the British and German media. A former French leader wrote an opinion piece in Le Monde, that was published in The Guardian, saying that Britain should leave the EU, that there has been enough of Britain making changes and it should just go. It would be interesting to see how the British membership of the EU plays out in the next few years. This debate over the leadership of the European Commission could have serious ramifications for the future of the European Union.