Following up on the macro-view of how MEPs network in the European Parliament, (i.e. how they table amendments across political groups and nationalities), this VoteWatch report shows which individual MEPs are the most open to collaboration and the keenest on developing EP networks in the current legislative term. Being a “policy hub” is critical for gaining influence and getting things done in the EP. Continue Reading
This is the first instance of a series providing key insights from our network-analysis of MEPs. Stay tuned for the second part to be published next week.
Due to the consensus-driven nature of the EP, amendments play a key role in bridging gaps between different factions and finding common positions on the way to the vote. As such, they provide crucial information about the bridge-builders and the hubs of influence. Continue Reading
*This is the second part of a series covering the political changes within EP Committees. Click here to read the first part.
The composition of EP committees aims to mirror the balance of power among political factions in the European Parliament as a whole. However, the same proportional distribution is not applied with regards to the representation of different national groups, which allows more freedom to MEPs. Continue Reading
On 30 September 2014, VoteWatch Europe presented a special policy brief that looks at the allocation of committee chairmanships and EP bureau posts since the 2004 EU enlargement until today. It shows that, as in the previous 10 years, the biggest and older Member States still hold the majority of the EP committees’ chairs positions. However, this representation gap between big/small and old/new Member States has substantially declined after the 2014 European elections, as a result of a combination of factors including the rise of anti-EU parties in ‘old’ EU. Continue Reading