The advocates of Transnationalism suggest that these lists “for the European Parliament are needed in order to develop the concept of pan-European citizenship”.
The majority of Europeans will prefer a continent at peace with itself. In England, we unfortunately term the mainland of Europe as “the Continent”, betraying an alliegence to historic mistrust, rather than willingly accepting that we are an island within a Continent and have centuries of common ground with regards to history, culture and ideals.
Being European is therefore relatively easy to agree with.
Nevertheless, the Federalist agenda is to bind us into one specific version of Europe.. A version which we as a Party are opposed to in many aspects.
One of the fundamental problems of a Brussels-led vision has been its cavalier idea that citizens can forget deep-set political beliefs and artificially adopt this version of European identity.
Moreover, there is no guarantee that democratic accountability would be improved.
Europeans already disenchanted with the lack of democracy within the EU would find pan-European parties a step in the wrong direction.
If we say we champion diversity, then I cannot see how transnational lists can possibly help. .
Widening the scope, our Green Party (EU111), we say that “European institutions must be designed with care and with mechanisms to prevent the drift towards centralism that has repeatedly been seen in history”.
As Green activists, we have the freedom to have our own personal beliefs. As an MEP, on any occasion where those personal beliefs differed from Party Policy, I would be bound by the principle that I could state them only if it was made clear that they were NOT party policy, and then immediately state the latter.
In terms of voting, I would follow Party policy because the mandate given by voters and “implicit contract” with Green Party activists is to pursue the policy and platform on which we had stood.
Farid Erkizia Bakht