Ambiguity rules in public's views of EU

WORLD VIEW:How are the continuing euro zone and austerity crises in Europe affecting public attitudes towards the European Union? Polling evidence from Eurobarometer shows a sharp decline of trust in its institutions – from 75 per cent in Ireland in 2007 to to 37 per cent in 2012 – and similar falls elsewhere. But paradoxically, identification with the EU has held up or even increased, as have demands that it take more effective action to tackle these problems – even while those opposed have deepened their hostility to deeper integration.

So despite sharper-than-average falling away of trust in member states acutely exposed to the crisis, such as Ireland, Portugal, Spain and Greece, and in social groups most affected – the less well educated, youth and working class voters – there is little evidence of a wholesale disenchantment. In fact levels of trust in EU institutions are commonly higher than for national governments and parliaments, although that too varies between southern and northern states, particularly Nordic ones.

As national politics and economics become increasingly entangled with the EU it becomes more important to understand the dynamics involved. Is the shift of budgetary decision-making towards Brussels agreed this week matched by similar changes in cross-national political accountability and democratic legitimacy? Is the crisis leading to more clearly identified groups seeking similar outcomes on a cross-national basis? How is it affecting existing patterns of European identity? These large questions await answers in politics and research, but both tend to be delayed by caution, vested interests and constraining or blinkered mindsets.

Nevertheless the Irish EU presidency has taken a commendable initiative to stimulate political debate among ministerial representatives about legitimacy and accountability. It is inviting them to say whether more input is needed on the emerging EU economic governance by national parliaments, what role political parties can play in it, how next year’s European Parliament elections can be used to enliven a European-wide political space, whether parties should nominate the commission president or s/he should be directly elected, and what new narratives should be developed about the nature of the EU – a theme eloquently addressed by President Michael D Higgins this week in Paris when he spoke on European citizenship.

When asked what they value about integration most people refer to freer travel, study and work around the EU. That mobility has increased greatly in the past 20 years and is taken for granted by the younger generation. Social research shows the major beneficiaries have been the best educated, the affluent and the young, who tend to be the most committed to deepening political relations as well.

There is a clear divide between this mainly transnational upper middle and middle class group, perhaps some 13 per cent in all, or 67 million people in the EU, who say they are European; the much larger nationally based middle, lower middle and working class groups who say they are national and European too; and the still very large group saying it is national only.

But cheaper air travel has given this Ryanair generation the opportunity to travel and make friends in other states and as a result their attitudes towards integration are becoming more positive.

The latest Eurobarometer 78 published last December shows majorities in favour of staying in the EU (58-32 per cent), keeping the euro (53/40), stronger economic co-ordination (76/16), moving against tax havens and tax avoidance (81/13), in favour of eurobonds (45/30), a financial transaction tax (81/13), moving towards a federation of nation states (45/35), protecting the poor ( 94/4) and developing a common defence and foreign policy (73/20).

Of course there are strong variations between creditor and borrower member states and northern and southern ones, just as attitudes within states vary between different social groups. Researchers are busy teasing out these variations to interpret or explain them, using different techniques of analysis. One of their main debates is between those who assume varying cultural socialisation, symbols and discourses differentiate attitudes towards Europe and those who argue they are better explained by greater mobility and association. If it is the latter, it would be better to encourage such transnational interaction economically and politically than try to create symbols with which people can identify from the top down.

Ettore Recchi, an Italian researcher, who spoke about it in Dublin this week, distinguishes between the images and perceptions individuals have of the EU, which fluctuate a lot according to circumstances, and more enduring identifications, which are more stable (see eucross.com).

Reconciling the two is a task for political leaders that their citizens often find wanting.