DOCSLIB.ORG

European Parliament Elections 2014 RESEARCH PAPER 14/32 11 June 2014

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
European Parliament Elections 2014 RESEARCH PAPER 14/32 11 June 2014 European Parliament Elections 2014 RESEARCH PAPER 14/32 11 June 2014 Elections to the European Parliament were held across the 28 states of the European Union between 22 and 25 May 2014. The UK elections were held concurrently with council elections in England and Northern Ireland on 22 May. The UK now has 73 MEPs, up from 72 at the last election, distributed between 12 regions. UKIP won 24 seats, Labour 20, the Conservatives 19, and the Green Party three. The Liberal Democrats won only one seat, down from 11 at the 2009 European election. The BNP lost both of the two seats they had won for the first time at the previous election. UKIP won the popular vote overall, and in six of the nine regions in England. Labour won the popular vote in Wales and the SNP won in Scotland. Across the UK as a whole turnout was 35%. Across Europe there was an increase in the number of seats held by Eurosceptic parties, although more centrist parties in established pro-European groups were still in the majority. The exact political balance of the new Parliament depends on the formation of the political groups. Turnout across the EU was 43%. It was relatively low in some of the newer Member States. Part 1 of this paper presents the full results of the UK elections, including regional analysis and local-level data. Part 2 presents a summary of the results across the EU, together with country-level summaries based on data from official national sources. Oliver Hawkins Vaughne Miller Recent Research Papers 14/22 Accident & Emergency Performance: England 2013/14. National and 14.04.14 regional data 14/23 Unemployment by Constituency, April 2014 16.04.14 14/24 High Speed Rail (London-West Midlands) Bill 22.04.14 [Bill 132-I & 132-II of 2013-14] 14/25 The European Union: a democratic institution? 29.04.14 14/26 Economic Indicators, May 2014 14.05.14 14/27 Consumer Rights Bill: Progress of the Bill 08.05.14 14/28 Deregulation Bill: Committee Stage Report 09.05.14 14/29 Marriage of same sex couples across the UK: What's the same and what's 15.05.14 the difference 14/30 Unemployment by Constituency, May 2014 14.05.14 14/31 Economic Indicators, June 2014 03.06.14 Research Paper 14/32 Contributing Authors: Oliver Hawkins, Social and General Statistics Vaughne Miller, International Affairs & Defence Jeremy Hardacre, Research and Library Central Team This information is provided to Members of Parliament in support of their parliamentary duties and is not intended to address the specific circumstances of any particular individual. It should not be relied upon as being up to date; the law or policies may have changed since it was last updated; and it should not be relied upon as legal or professional advice or as a substitute for it. A suitably qualified professional should be consulted if specific advice or information is required. This information is provided subject to our general terms and conditions which are available online or may be provided on request in hard copy. Authors are available to discuss the content of this briefing with Members and their staff, but not with the general public. We welcome comments on our papers; these should be e-mailed to [email protected]. ISSN 1368-8456 RESEARCH PAPER 14/32 Contents Summary 1 1 The political context before the elections 2 1.1 Government plans for reform and renegotiation 2 1.2 The UK election campaign 4 1.3 The new European Parliament 5 Forming political groups 5 The new Commission president 7 Prospects for Eurosceptic groups 8 1.4 Key issues for the UK Government 9 1.5 Is there support for reform in other EU Member States? 11 2 Results in the United Kingdom 12 2.1 Summary of results 12 2.2 Turnout 14 2.3 The d’Hondt system 15 2.4 Results at a regional level 16 Great Britain 17 North East 18 North West 19 Yorkshire and the Humber 20 East Midlands 21 West Midlands 22 East 23 London 24 South East 25 South West 26 Wales 27 Scotland 28 Northern Ireland 29 2.5 Results at local level 30 2.6 UK MEPs by gender and experience 31 2.7 European Parliament election results at local level, Great Britain 33 2.8 UK MEPs by party 42 RESEARCH PAPER 14/32 3 Results across the European Union 44 3.1 Turnout 44 3.2 Seats in the European Parliament 45 3.3 Women and Men in the European Parliament 47 3.4 Country-level analysis 47 RESEARCH PAPER 14/32 Summary Elections to the European Parliament were held across the 28 states of the European Union between 22 and 25 May 2014. Results in the UK The UK elections were held concurrently with council elections in England and Northern Ireland on 22 May. The UK now has 73 MEPs, up from 72 at the last election, distributed between 12 regions. UKIP won 24 seats, Labour 20, the Conservatives 19, and the Green Party three. The Liberal Democrats won only one seat, down from 11 at the 2009 European election. The BNP lost both of the two seats they had won for the first time at the previous European election. Across Great Britain, UKIP were first with 27.5% of the vote. Labour came second with 25.4%, ahead of the Conservatives with 23.9%. Labour won the popular vote in Wales, while the SNP came first in Scotland. UKIP came first in six of the nine English regions, with their strongest performances in the East, the East Midlands, the South East and the South West. Sinn Féin won the most first preference votes in Northern Ireland. UKIP’s share of the vote increased by 11.0% points, while Labour’s increased by 9.7% points. The Conservative and Liberal Democrat shares fell by 3.8% points and 6.9% points respectively. UK turnout was 35.4%, slightly higher than 34.5% in 2009, but lower than 38.4% in 2004, when four regions held all-postal ballots. Results across the EU MEPs from different countries are elected from national parties, but in the European Parliament many join political groups; after the 2014 elections the largest of these is likely to be European People’s Party. The second largest group is the Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats. New groups and allegiances are likely to be formed during the new Parliament. Across Europe there was an increase in the number of seats held by Eurosceptic parties, although more centrist parties in established pro-European groups were still in the majority. The exact political balance of the new Parliament depends on the formation of the political groups Turnout across the EU was 43%. It was relatively low in some of the newer Member States. The proportion of women MEPs was 37%, the highest recorded at any European election so far. 1 RESEARCH PAPER 14/32 1 The political context before the elections Most polls before the EP elections predicted another low turnout, a rise in the Eurosceptic vote and that immigration would be one of the most contentious campaign issues. Anger over EU-imposed austerity measures, high unemployment and immigration were reported to be the main causes for the increase in support for anti-EU parties across the EU. Polls towards the beginning of 2014 predicted that the “fragmented agglomeration of extreme right-wing and right-populist parties could take about 80 of the 751 seats in the next Parliament” – roughly 10%.1 Open Europe estimated in spring 2014 that anti-EU and eurosceptic parties of various forms could win as much as 31% of the vote.2 Adopting a more narrow definition of anti-European parties, the research organisation Absolute Strategy predicted an anti-EU vote of 18%.3 The EU debate in the UK has been dominated in recent years by the issues of EU accountability, the amount of legislation coming from Europe, the consequences of freedom of movement (particularly from new accession states in Eastern Europe), and the need for a referendum on continued EU membership. The 2009 Conservative European election manifesto made references to a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty if they came to power before the Treaty was implemented, but there was no commitment to an in/out referendum if they came to office. The Conservative Party general election manifesto in 2010 pledged to return key powers over legal rights, criminal justice and social and employment legislation to the UK (repatriation), but did not promise a referendum on EU membership. The Conservative-led Government introduced new provisions to approve EU proposals in the form of the European Union Act 2011, which provided for enhanced scrutiny of EU proposals or Treaty changes that would transfer power from Westminster to the EU. There were provisions for primary legislation and in certain cases a referendum before UK approval of EU measures, but this referendum would not be on EU membership.4 There were renewed calls for an in/out referendum on EU membership, to which the Government responded in January 2013 with a pledge to hold one by the end of 2017, after renegotiating the terms of the UK’s EU membership. This pledge was emphasised in the Conservatives’ 2014 European election manifesto. 1.1 Government plans for reform and renegotiation The Government believes that the EU should do less and the Member States should do more. To investigate the extent to which the EU is involved in policy- and law-making across a broad range of areas, in July 2012 the Government launched a Review of the Balance of Competences between the EU and the UK.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • European Parliament Elections 2014
    European Parliament Elections 2014 Updated 12 March 2014 Overview of Candidates in the United Kingdom Contents 1.0 INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................... 2 2.0 CANDIDATE SELECTION PROCESS ............................................................................................. 2 3.0 EUROPEAN ELECTIONS: VOTING METHOD IN THE UK ................................................................ 3 4.0 PRELIMINARY OVERVIEW OF CANDIDATES BY UK CONSTITUENCY ............................................ 3 5.0 ANNEX: LIST OF SITTING UK MEMBERS OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT ................................ 16 6.0 ABOUT US ............................................................................................................................. 17 All images used in this briefing are © Barryob / Wikimedia Commons / CC-BY-SA-3.0 / GFDL © DeHavilland EU Ltd 2014. All rights reserved. 1 | 18 European Parliament Elections 2014 1.0 Introduction This briefing is part of DeHavilland EU’s Foresight Report series on the 2014 European elections and provides a preliminary overview of the candidates standing in the UK for election to the European Parliament in 2014. In the United Kingdom, the election for the country’s 73 Members of the European Parliament will be held on Thursday 22 May 2014. The elections come at a crucial junction for UK-EU relations, and are likely to have far-reaching consequences for the UK’s relationship with the rest of Europe: a surge in support for the UK Independence Party (UKIP) could lead to a Britain that is increasingly dis-engaged from the EU policy-making process. In parallel, the current UK Government is also conducting a review of the EU’s powers and Prime Minister David Cameron has repeatedly pushed for a ‘repatriation’ of powers from the European to the national level. These long-term political developments aside, the elections will also have more direct and tangible consequences.
    [Show full text]
  • Lord-Pearsons-Letter-Of-Complaint-To
    COMPLAINT: COVERAGE BY “TODAY”, SINCE THE WILSON REPORT, OF THE CASE FOR THE UK TO WITHDRAW FROM THE EU. BACKGROUND The 2005 Wilson Report into the BBC’s coverage of EU affairs was the Corporation’s first published independent analysis of its output. Its committee of inquiry was chaired by Lord Wilson of Dinton, formerly Cabinet Secretary and Head of the Civil Service. This complaint is that the BBC has not delivered the improvements it promised in its response to that report, of its coverage of EU affairs. This applies particularly to the debate about the UK’s withdrawal from the EU. The Wilson Report was published in January 2005. It was critical of parts of the relevant output. It said: …we do think there is a serious problem. Although the BBC wishes to be impartial in its news coverage of the EU it is not succeeding. Whatever the intention, nobody thinks the outcome is impartial. There is strong disagreement about the net balance but all parties show remarkable unity in identifying the elements of the problem. Sometimes being attacked from all sides is a sign that an organisation is getting it right. That is not so here. It is a sign that the BBC is getting it wrong, and our main conclusion is that urgent action is required to put this right. The problem can be summarised under a number of headings which we analyse below.1 Institutional mindset. Giving the audience the information it needs to make up its own mind is a proper and important role for the BBC and one which it must carry out.
    [Show full text]
  • European Elections in the UK Media Briefing 7Th May 2014 UKIP and the 2014 European Parliament Elections
    European Elections in the UK Media Briefing 7th May 2014 UKIP and the 2014 European Parliament elections Dr Philip Lynch ([email protected]) & Dr Richard Whitaker ([email protected]) University of Leicester UKIP and the 2014 European Elections Philip Lynch ( [email protected], @drphiliplynch ) and Richard Whitaker ( [email protected], @rickwhitaker ) Department of Politics and International Relations, University of Leicester UKIP go into the 2014 European elections in a far stronger position than they did five years earlier. The crucial differences are first, that UKIP have not experienced the decline in support in general election polling that they normally do after a European election. On the contrary, they are now consistently placed in third position in polls of general election vote intentions. Second, their ratings in polls of European election vote intention are some ten points higher on average than they were in the run up to the 2009 contest for seats in the European Parliament (EP). Third, they have more than double the number of members and a much better, even if still small base in local councils having secured 147 seats in the 2013 local elections. Fourth, while they have benefitted in the past from Conservative supporters lending UKIP their vote, they are in an even better position to do so this time around given that the Tories are now in government. On top of that, if UKIP’s campaign to win even more support from working class voters is successful, they will make headway in areas where Labour are traditionally strong. The presence of the Liberal Democrats in government alongside the collapse of the BNP add to the auspicious conditions for UKIP in 2014.
    [Show full text]
  • European Policy Briefs Produced by the Federal Trust
    TTHEHE FEDERALFEDERAL TRUSTTRUST TTHEHE FEDERALFEDERALfor education TRUSTTRUST & research enlightening the debate on good governance EuropeanPolicyBrief Mar 2006 • Issue 25 • The Federal Trust, 7 Graphite Square, Vauxhall Walk, London SE11 5EE • www.fedtrust.co.uk To leave or not to leave? The Conservatives and the European People's Party in the European Parliament David Cameron, the new leader of the Conservative Party, has been accused by his critics of favouring style over substance, and yet on one issue his position has been very clear: he wants to see the Conservatives leave their current political group in the European Parliament (EP). This party group, known as the European People's Party-European Democrats (EPP-ED), is currently the largest in the EP, with 264 seats, of which British Conservatives hold 27.1 David Cameron believes that the views and aims of the group are fundamentally at odds with Conservative beliefs. In particular, he argues that the Conservatives do not share the EPP-ED's pro-integrationist ambitions. He has also claimed that on free trade and the transatlantic partnership the group does not have the same views as the Conservatives. An objective assessment of the choices facing the Conservatives shows that a decision to leave the EPP-ED will have mixed consequences. The legislative influence of the Party in the European Parliament would probably be reduced, while the organisational benefits are not entirely clear. In addition, the areas of disagreement with the EPP are not the matters the Parliament concerns itself with most. On the economic issues, which dominate the agenda of the European Parliament, the Conservatives are probably closest to the EPP out of all the existing party groups.
    [Show full text]
  • 1999 Election Candidates | European Parliament Information Office in the United Kin
    1999 Election Candidates | European Parliament Information Office in the United Kin ... Page 1 of 10 UK Office of the European Parliament Home > 1999 > 1999 Election Candidates Candidates The list of candidates was based on the information supplied by Regional Returning Officers at the close of nominations on 13 May 2004. Whilst every care was taken to ensure that this information is accurate, we cannot accept responsibility for any omissions or inaccuracies or for any consequences that may result. Voters in the UK's twelve EU constituencies will elect 78 MEPs. The distribution of seats is as follows: Eastern: 7 East Midlands: 6 London: 9 North East: 3 North West: 9 South East: 10 South West: 7 West Midlands: 7 Yorkshire and the Humber: 6 Scotland: 7 Wales: 4 Northern Ireland: 3 Eastern LABOUR CONSERVATIVE 1. Eryl McNally, MEP 1. Robert Sturdy, MEP 2. Richard Howitt, MEP 2. Christopher Beazley 3. Clive Needle, MEP 3. Bashir Khanbhai 4. Peter Truscott, MEP 4. Geoffrey Van Orden 5. David Thomas, MEP 5. Robert Gordon 6. Virginia Bucknor 6. Kay Twitchen 7. Beth Kelly 7. Sir Graham Bright 8. Ruth Bagnall 8. Charles Rose LIBERAL DEMOCRAT GREEN 1. Andrew Duff 1. Margaret Elizabeth Wright 2. Rosalind Scott 2. Marc Scheimann 3. Robert Browne 3. Eleanor Jessy Burgess 4. Lorna Spenceley 4. Malcolm Powell 5. Chris White 5. James Abbott 6. Charlotte Cane 6. Jennifer Berry 7. Paul Burall 7. Angela Joan Thomson 8. Rosalind Gill 8. Adrian Holmes UK INDEPENDENCE PRO EURO CONSERVATIVE PARTY 1. Jeffrey Titford 1. Paul Howell 2. Bryan Smalley 2.
    [Show full text]
  • Ukip 2017 Manifesto
    BRITAIN TOGETHER UKIP 2017 MANIFESTO www.ukip.org/manifesto2017 Britain Together Paul Nuttall MEP UKIP Party Leader I have always believed that them down, time and time again. UKIP is at its best when it is You can guarantee that when being radical. It is strongest UKIP says something, we when it is being bold and mean it. leading the political agenda rather than following. This is a unique general election: it is about how the We have done this on Brexit negotiations will be numerous occasions over handled in the years to come the years: when we first said and this makes UKIP more that Britain could not only important than ever before. survive but prosper outside the We are the country’s insurance European Union, the political policy, the guard dogs of Brexit. class laughed at us. When we We have fought for Brexit all our spoke of the need for a points- political lives and we want to based system for migrants If you believe in Britain, ensure that the people get the we were derided as racists kind of Brexit they voted for on if you believe in our values, and xenophobes by the same 23rd June last year. and if you believe in real people. This is now government policy for non-EU migrants. This does not mean we just Brexit, then vote UKIP control immigration and reduce on 8th June. In many ways, UKIP was a the numbers of people coming decade ahead of its time to our country. It means we are on these issues and in this not saddled with a huge divorce manifesto UKIP is once again bill, we reclaim our waters, and setting the agenda.
    [Show full text]
  • Democracy in the European Parliament
    FIRST DRAFT Comments Welcome Democracy in the European Parliament by Simon Hix London School of Economics and Political Science Abdul Noury Free University of Brussels Gérard Roland University of California, Berkeley 11 July 2005 S. Hix, A. Noury and G. Roland (2005) Democracy in the European Parliament Detailed Table of Contents Introduction ........................................................................................................................................... 1 Summary of the Argument and the Main Findings ........................................................................ 4 Outline of the Book ......................................................................................................................... 7 Lessons for Political Science and European Politics .................................................................... 10 Chapter 1 Development of the European Parliament ....................................................................... 15 1.1. Powers of the European Parliament ....................................................................................... 15 1.1.1. Power to Control the Executive: A Hybrid Model ....................................................... 17 1.1.2. Power to Make Legislation: From a Lobbyist to a Co-Legislator................................. 21 1.2. Political Parties in the European Parliament: A ‘Two-Plus-Several’ Party System .............. 25 1.3. The Electoral Disconnection .................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Act Before July 5 to Ban Illegal Timber in the UK and Europe
    “It is very important that people in other countries help us to preserve our forests by not using illegal wood. I would like voters in Europe to support this ban on importing illegal wood as it will serve our children – they will inherit the results.” Alberto Granados, Olancho, Honduras Act before July 5 to ban illegal timber in the UK and Europe: www.progressio.org.ukAct before July 5 to ban illegal timber from the UK and Europe Thank you for downloading this PROactive campaign action sheet and for supporting Progressio’s illegal logging action. The vote is on July 5, so there’s not much time to get our voices heard. While there is some hope in the European Parliament for the legislation which has been agreed, we still need to make sure our politicians know that there is public support to ban illegal timber. This is our chance and it is vital that we take it. Included on this sheet is everything you’ll need to tell our politicians we don’t want illegal timber in the UK or Europe: A short text for your church bulletin or to email around A general intercession for Sunday Mass on June 27 and July 4 A suggested text to write a letter to MEPs A list of MEPs by region A poster to print and display in a prominent place is included on the front of this pack Short text: You can use the following text in your church bulletin or personal emails to spread the word: Illegal logging is a disaster for poor communities.
    [Show full text]
  • MEP Contact Details
    Annex 2: MEP contact details Below is a list of all the UK MEPs, along with their room numbers and email addresses. There are multiple MEPs for each constituency. The list of English MEPs includes the counties that make up each constituency. You can also find their details online at www.europarl.org.uk/en/your-meps.html. Please write (letter or email) to one or more of the MEPs for your region. If you are sending a physical letter, international standard postage to Belgium costs £1.00 and takes 3-5 days to arrive. All MEPs can be reached in writing at: [Insert MEP name here] European Parliament Bât. Altiero Spinelli [Insert the MEP’s room number here] 60 rue Wiertz B-1047 Brussels, Belgium Constituency MEP Name Room Email No. Northern Ireland Ms Martina Anderson (Sinn Fein) T0514 [email protected] 5 Ms Diane Dodds (Democratic 11G20 [email protected] Unionist Party) 6 Mr Jim Nicholson (Ulster 04M04 [email protected] Unionist Party) 7 Scotland Mr David Martin (Labour) 13G15 [email protected] 7 Mr Ian Hudghton (SNP) 04F35 [email protected] 3 Mr David Coburn (UKIP) 03F15 [email protected] 1 Mrs Catherine Stihler (Labour) 13G35 [email protected] 5 Dr Ian Duncan (Conservative) 06M08 [email protected] 7 Mr Alyn Smith (SNP) 04F34 [email protected] 3 Wales Ms Jill Evans (Plaid Cymru) 04F37 [email protected] 4 Constituency MEP Name Room Email No. Mr Nathan Gill (UKIP) 03F15 [email protected] 5 Ms Kay Swinburne 04M08 kayswinburnemep@welshconservativ es.com (Conservative)
    [Show full text]
  • Download Our Media Guide in PDF Format
    1 EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT INFORMATION OFFICE IN THE UK MEDIA GUIDE 2014 - 2019 This guide provides journalists with information on: • The European Parliament and its activities • The 2009 and 2014 European elections • A Who’s Who in the European Parliament • Press contacts • What the UK Office does Björn Kjellström Olga Dziewulska Head of UK Office Press Attachée Tel: 020 7227 4325 Tel: 020 7227 4335 Disclaimer: All information in this guide was true and correct at the time of publication. Updated information can be found on our website. www.europarl.org.uk @EPinUK 2 3 Introduction by Björn Kjellström, Head of the European Parliament Information Office in the UK Every 5 years over 500 million people in the EU have the power to choose who will represent them in the European Parliament, the world's most open and only directly elected international parliament. Our mission is to raise awareness of its role and powers, of how political differences within it are played out and of how decisions taken by its Members affect the UK. These decisions have a huge impact on everyday life and it makes a big difference who decides on our behalf. Since journalists and the media in the UK play a key role in informing citizens about how the work of the European Parliament affects them, we hope that you will find this guide useful. 4 The European Parliament Information Office in the UK Our Role: We do our best to reach as broad a spectrum of society as we can – both face to face, online and in print.
    [Show full text]
  • Network Jan Feb 2014
    The bimonthly magazine for Usdaw activists|www.usdaw.org.uk|January/February 2014 WORLD CLASS REPS n Activist-in-depth n Black Members’ n Spotlight Day 2014 Paul Young Weekend Workshop March 19 will be the focus Tesco rep from Activists from for the Supporting the North Eastern the black and Parents & Carers division on his Asian campaign union involvement communities page 15 and busy met up in working life Manchester page 19 page 20 GENERAL NETWORK | WWW.USDAW.ORG.UK SECRETARY Fairness battle General secretary John Hannett’s comment sdaw’s fight for justice for former Woolworths and Ethel Austin staff, who missed out on a U protective award because they worked in small stores, faces a further wait after the Appeal Court referred the case to the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), for its view of the legal position. Our members lost out because the interpretation of the law at the time of the job losses considered each store a ‘separate establishment’ and where a store had fewer than 20 staff they were excluded from the protective award payment, which compensates workers who have not been properly consulted prior to losing their job. In both cases the administrators failed to consult. And while Usdaw won compensation for staff in the bigger stores others lost out. In May 2013 Usdaw won a landmark legal case to overturn the ‘one establishment’ ruling only for the Coalition to appeal the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) decision. In fact the Government did not even turn up for the EAT hearing and although their appeal was later allowed they were forced to pay the union’s legal costs.
    [Show full text]
  • The 'Dispossessed', The'never-Possessed' and The
    The ‘Dispossessed’, and the ‘Bastards’ the ‘Never-Possessed’ ‘Dispossessed’, The the‘Never-Possessed’ The ‘Dispossessed’, and the‘Bastards’ Debunking Major’s Myths of the Eurosceptics the‘Never-Possessed’ Euroscepticism within the Conservative Party has been growing steadily since the Maastricth Rebellion of 1993. And yet the lessons of those turbulent months have yet to be learned properly. This book sets out clearly the reasons why some MPs rebelled and the‘Bastards’ and others did not - and points the way to the future. Debunking Major’s Myths of the Eurosceptics Between 1992 and 1993 the Maastricht Rebellion tore apart John Major’s Conservative Government. An ever-shifting group of Eurosceptic rebels consumed hours of Parliamentary time, derailed legislation and brought the government to the brink of collapse. Major denounced the rebels as the ‘Dispossessed’, the ‘Never-Possessed’ and the ‘Bastards’. This paper rebuts the myths about the Maastricht rebels. Luke Stanley Debunking Major’s Myths of the Eurosceptics Myths of Debunking Major’s With Prime Minister Cameron’s proposed renegotiation and referendum on EU The Bruges Group membership set to take place in 2017 recognising the factors affecting MPs’ willingness to defy the party line is vital. Should Cameron secure re-election at the head of a minority or slim-majority government, the ensuing Europe debate within the Conservative Party is likely to be even more divisive than Maastricht. Understanding MPs’ behaviour on Europe will allow the pro-withdrawal faction to assess the optimum methods of convincing MPs to side with them, as well as how to counter the Europhile faction’s attempts to poach their followers.
    [Show full text]