Misplaced Pages

#816183

91-519: The political groups of the European Parliament are the officially recognised parliamentary groups consisting of legislators of aligned ideologies in the European Parliament . The European Parliament is unique among supranational assemblies in that its members (MEPs) organise themselves into ideological groups, rather than national cleavages . Each political group is assumed to have

182-473: A "No" vote would be tantamount to a vote of no confidence . PES leader Pauline Green MEP attempted a vote of confidence and the EPP put forward countermotions. During this period the two Groups adopted a government- opposition dynamic, with PES supporting the executive and EPP renouncing its previous coalition support and voting it down. In 2004 there was another notable break in the grand coalition. It occurred over

273-567: A 2005 discussion paper from the Institute for International Integration Studies by Gail McElroy and Kenneth Benoit analysed the group positions between April and June 2004, at the end of the Fifth Parliament and immediately before the 2004 elections. The results are given below, with 0% = extremely against, 100% = extremely for (except for the left-right spectrum, where 0% = extremely left-wing, 100% = extremely right-wing) Major changes compared to

364-612: A European party" primarily if they are members of a European party's national member parties. As a result, many European parties have more MEPs than they have individual members. Member parties are national political parties with some form of membership described in the statutes of the European political party. In its November 2020 ACRE v Parliament ruling, the General Court of the European Union clarified that political parties outside of

455-476: A European party's reimbursable expenditure (referred to as the "co-financing rate"); this means that European parties were required to raise 25% of their budget from specific private sources ("own resources"), such as donations or member contributions. Regulation 2004/2003 also introduced transparency obligations, limitations on donations, and prohibitions on spending, including a ban on the direct or indirect funding of national parties and candidates. The Regulation

546-622: A collective vote, others do not provide them with voting rights at all. Below is the number of individual members per European party, as reported by the European Parliament: Final amounts of public funding to European parties for 2021 European parties use public and private funding to finance their activities; public funding refers exclusively to funding from the general budget of the European Union , and cannot directly come from Member States or third countries, or entities under their control. With regards to public funding, each year,

637-416: A female majority, so the scale stops at 50%). The results are also given in the table below. G/EFA, PES and ALDE were the most balanced groups in terms of gender, with IND/DEM being the most unbalanced. The Parliament does not form a government in the traditional sense and its politics have developed over consensual rather than adversarial lines as a form of consociationalism . No single group has ever held

728-822: A group acted on a specific vote, they provide little information on the voting patterns of a specific group. As a result, the only bodies providing analysis of the voting patterns and Weltanschauung of the groups are academics. Academics analysing the European political groups include Simon Hix ( London School of Economics and Political Science ), Amie Kreppel University of Florida , Abdul Noury ( Free University of Brussels ), Gérard Roland , ( University of California, Berkeley ), Gail McElroy ( Trinity College Dublin , Department of Political Science), Kenneth Benoit ( Trinity College Dublin – Institute for International Integration Studies (IIIS)), Friedrich Heinemann , Philipp Mohl , and Steffen Osterloh ( University of Mannheim – Centre for European Economic Research ). Cohesion

819-563: A group). The same is true of the Renew Europe Group, most of whose members are from the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe Party , but also includes a dozen from the small European Democratic Party . Both have also had independents and MEPs from minor parties also join their Group. For a Group to be formally recognised in the Parliament, it must fulfil the conditions laid down in

910-502: A limited role. The APPF monitors donations and contributions to European political parties, and publishes a yearly list of political donors. Article 6 of Regulation 1141/2014 empowers the APPF to impose sanctions on European parties, as detailed in Article 27. The APPF can deregister a European political party if: The APPF can apply financial sanctions to a European party if: Additionally,

1001-606: A majority in Parliament. Historically, the two largest parliamentary formations have been the EPP Group and the PES Group , which are affiliated to their respective European political parties , the European People's Party (EPP) and the Party of European Socialists (PES). These two groups have dominated the Parliament for much of its life, continuously holding between 50 and 70 per cent of

SECTION 10

#1732884089817

1092-517: A member "requires a genuine membership link with the European political party", which includes "a full range of rights and obligations [...] in particular voting/participation/access to documents" and "an appropriate membership fee". There is no legal definition of what constitutes individual membership, leading European parties to define them differently. A common trait is their absence of, or limited, input in party decision-making; some parties comprise internal bodies representing individual members with

1183-503: A new category of "own resources", allowing European parties to raise private funding from specific economic activities, such as seminar fees or publication sales; funding from this new category would be capped at 5% of European parties' budget. Finally, it proposed allowing European parties to receive contributions from national member parties located in non-EU members of the Council of Europe . The European Parliament's AFCO Committee criticised

1274-755: A number of changes, including the following: In March 2019, the European Parliament and the Council adopted Regulation 2019/493, which further amended Regulation 1141/2014. Changes focused mostly on the use of personal data by European political parties and foundations. The modalities of the implementation of the Regulation were later updated by the Decision of the Bureau of the European Parliament of 1 July 2019. In June 2021, in line with Article 38 of Regulation 1141/2014, MEPs Charles Goerens ( ALDE ) and Rainer Wieland ( EPP ) of

1365-533: A region's group of countries') parliament(s), and, in a broader scope, to foster the bilateral relations between said countries. Parliamentary friendship groups play an important role in New Zealand's engagement in inter-parliamentary relations, with group members often called upon to participate and host meetings for visiting delegations from the other part, as well as often being invited by the other country's parliament to visit it. Friendship Groups do not speak for

1456-505: A set of core principles, and political groups that cannot demonstrate this may be disbanded (see below ). A political group of the EP usually constitutes the formal parliamentary representation of one or two of the European political parties (Europarty), sometimes supplemented by members from other national political parties or independent politicians. In contrast to the European political parties, it

1547-683: A shared political group: for example, the European Free Alliance (half a dozen MEPs in the ninth Parliament) and the European Green Party (over 50 MEPs in the ninth Parliament) have, since 1999, felt they are stronger by working together in the European Greens–European Free Alliance Group than they would have as stand-alone groups (especially for the EFA, which would not otherwise have enough members to constitute

1638-399: Is a phenomenon that gained force especially in the legislatures during the 1990s, up to a maximum of 18% for the 1989–1994 term, with strong prevalence among representatives from France and Italy, though by no means limited to those two countries. There is a clear tendency of party group switches from the ideological extremes, both left and right, toward the center. Most switching takes place at

1729-480: Is strictly forbidden for political groups to organise or finance the political campaign during the European elections since this is the exclusive responsibility of the parties. But there are other incentives for MEPs to organise in parliamentary Groups: besides the political advantages of working together with like-minded colleagues, Groups have some procedural privileges within the Parliament (such as Group spokespersons speaking first in debates, Group leaders representing

1820-441: Is the anti-pro Europe spectrum, (0% = extremely anti-Europe, 100% = extremely pro), and the horizontal scale is the economic left-right spectrum, (0% = extremely economically left-wing, 100% = extremely economically right-wing). The results are also shown in the table below. Two of the groups (EPP-ED and IND/DEM) were split. EPP-ED are split on Euroscepticism: the EPP subgroup (     ) were centre-right Europhiles, whereas

1911-482: Is the term used to define whether a Group is united or divided amongst itself. Figure 1 of a 2002 paper from European Integration online Papers (EIoP) by Thorsten Faas analysed the Groups as they stood in 2002. The results for each Group are given in the adjacent diagram with the horizontal scale scaled so that 0% = totally split, 100% = totally united. The results are also given in the table below. G/EFA, PES and ELDR were

SECTION 20

#1732884089817

2002-507: Is to support the leadership by enforcing party discipline . In Armenia , political parties often form parliamentary groups before running in elections. Prior to the 2021 Armenian parliamentary elections , four different parliamentary groups were formed. A parliamentary group must pass the 7% electoral threshold in order to gain representation in the National Assembly . Higher electoral thresholds for parliamentary groups discourages

2093-407: Is typically led by a parliamentary group leader or chairperson , though some parliamentary groups have two or more co-leaders . If the parliamentary group is represented in the legislature, the leader is almost always chosen from among the sitting members; if the leader does not yet have a seat in the legislature, a sitting member of the group may be expected to resign to make way for him or her. If

2184-723: The European Democratic Union Group. When Conservatives from Denmark and the United Kingdom joined, they created the European Conservatives Group, which (after some name changes) eventually merged with the Group of the European People's Party. The 1979 first direct election established further groups and the establishment of European political parties such as the European People's Party. The mandate of

2275-530: The European Parliament are the Parliament's political groups . European parties influence the decision-making process of the European Council through coordination meetings with their affiliated heads of state and government. They also work closely with their members in the European Commission. In addition to the registered European political parties, many other entities are politically active at

2366-506: The European Parliament . Groups can table motions for resolutions and table amendments to reports. EUL/NGL and G/EFA were the most left-wing groups, UEN and EDD the most right-wing, and that was mirrored in their attitudes towards taxation, homosexual equality, abortion, euthanasia and controlling migration into the EU. The groups fell into two distinct camps regarding the further development of EU authority, with UEN and EDD definitely against and

2457-496: The Netherlands ( fractie ); Poland ( klub ), Switzerland ( fraction / Fraktion / frazione ); Romania ( grup parlamentar ); and Russia ( фракция/fraktsiya ), Spain ('grupo parlamentario'), and Ukraine ( фракція/fraktsiya ). Generally, parliamentary groups have some independence from the wider party organisations. It is often thought improper for elected MPs to take instructions solely from non-elected party officials or from

2548-559: The Parliament of Canada . A parliamentary group is sometimes called the parliamentary wing of a party, as distinct from its organizational wing . Equivalent terms are used in different countries, including: Argentina ( bloque and interbloque ), Australia (party room); Austria ( Klub ); Belgium ( fractie / fraction / Fraktion ); Brazil and Portugal ("grupo parlamentar" or, informally, "bancadas"); Germany ( Fraktion ); Italy ( gruppo ), Finland (eduskuntaryhmä/ riksdagsgrupp );

2639-486: The Parliamentary Friendship Groups , also called Inter-Parliamentary Friendship Groups , Friendship Parliamentary Groups , or Parliamentary Group of Friendship [and Cooperation] . "Parliamentary Friendship" groups are groups of congresspeople/members of parliament who voluntarily organise themselves to promote parliamentary relations between their own Parliament and another country's (or even

2730-526: The Party of European Socialists ) or they can include more than one European party as well as national parties and independents, such as the Greens–European Free Alliance group. Each group appoints a leader, referred to as a "president", "co-ordinator" or "chair". The chairs of each Group meet in the Conference of Presidents to decide what issues will be dealt with at the plenary session of

2821-504: The United Kingdom Parliament there exist associations of MPs called "all-party parliamentary groups", which bring together members of different parliamentary groups who wish to involve themselves with a particular subject. This term is in a sense the opposite of the term 'parliamentary group', which designates a group that includes only members of the same party or electoral fusion. One special kind of parliamentary groups are

Political groups of the European Parliament - Misplaced Pages Continue

2912-472: The party platforms of their constituent parties, and then with limited certainty. Parliamentary group Parliamentary groups may elect a parliamentary leader ; such leaders are often important political players. Parliamentary groups in some cases use party discipline to control the votes of their members. Parliamentary groups correspond to " caucuses " in the United States Congress and

3003-539: The recast procedure. The Commission's document proposes a definition of political advertising, strengthens provisions on gender balance, clarifies the requirements for the display of the logo of the European political party by its member parties, and extends the obligation to comply with EU values to member parties. With regards to funding, this proposal retained the European Parliament's suggestion to lower European parties' co-financing rate (decreasing it from 10% down to 5%, and down to 0% in election years). It also included

3094-464: The " grand coalition " and, aside from a break in the fifth Parliament, it has dominated the Parliament for much of its life, regardless of necessity. The grand coalition is visible in the agreement between the two Groups to divide the five-year term of the President of the European Parliament equally between them, with an EPP president for half the term and a PES president for the other half, regardless of

3185-454: The ED subgroup (     ) were right-wing Eurosceptics. IND/DEM was also split along its subgroups: the reformist subgroup (     , bottom-center) voted as centrist Eurosceptics, and the secessionist subgroup (     , middle-right) voted as right-wing Euroneutrals. The reformist subgroup was able to pursue a reformist agenda via the Parliament. The secessionist subgroup

3276-479: The EU could not be regarded as political parties within the meaning of Regulation 1141/2014, because they were not composed of Union citizens. In its guidance, the APPF that European parties "are free to cooperate with parties or organisations by means of ancillary forms of association (e.g., observers, partners, associates, affiliates)", but only a member can be claimed to meet the registration criteria, and only they can provide member contributions. Being considered

3367-624: The European Parliament allocates a total amount of money to fund European political parties qualifying for European public funding: 10% of this amount is distributed via a lump sum, allocated equally to all qualifying European parties, while 90% is distributed in proportion to each party's share MEPs. For the financial year 2025, European political parties were allocated a total of €46 million. Depending on their own application for European public funding and on their amount of "reimbursable expenses", European parties may in fine receive less than their maximum allocation. European public funding accounts for

3458-408: The European Parliament is becoming increasingly based around party and ideology. Voting is increasingly split along left-right lines, and the cohesion of the party groups has risen dramatically, particularly in the fourth and fifth parliaments. So there are likely to be policy implications here too. The dynamical coalitions in the European Parliament show year-to-year changes. Party group switching in

3549-417: The European Parliament is the phenomenon where parliamentarians individually or collectively switch from one party group to the other. The phenomenon of EP party group switching is a well-known contributor to the volatility of the EP party system and highlights the fluidity that characterizes the composition of European political groups. On average 9% of MEPs switch during legislative terms. Party group switching

3640-535: The European Parliament may exclude a European party from future public funding for up to 10 years if it has engaged in illegal activities detrimental to the financial interests of the Union, or has omitted information or provided false or misleading information. For "non-quantifiable infringements", the financial sanction ranges from 5 to 20% of the annual budget of the European political party, and 50% of its annual budget when it has engaged in illegal activities detrimental to

3731-472: The European Parliament's Committee on Constitutional Affairs (AFCO) presented a draft report on the implementation of the Regulation. With regards to funding, the draft report called on the Commission and co-legislators to clarify the definition of indirect funding from European political parties and foundations to national member parties, remove the ban on financing referendum campaigns on European issues, allow

Political groups of the European Parliament - Misplaced Pages Continue

3822-461: The European level without meeting the criteria for registration or wishing to register. The first European political parties formed during the 1970s, in the run-up to the first elections of the European Parliament by direct universal suffrage (adopted in 1976, and taking place for the first time in 1979 ). In 1973, following the enlargement of the European Community to Denmark, Ireland, and

3913-544: The Functioning of the European Union (at the time, the "Treaty establishing the European Economic Community") to explicitly allow the funding of European political parties from the budget of the European Union. The new paragraph stated that "the Council, acting in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 251, shall lay down the regulations governing political parties at European level and in particular

4004-546: The Government of their own country, or even for the whole of the Parliament/Congress to which they belong, as they are usually self-regulating and self-fulfilling. Parliamentary Friendship Groups are active in the national congresses/parliaments of countries such as Armenia, Australia, Brazil, Canada, Germany, Israel, Laos, New Zealand, Pakistan, Peru, Romania, Serbia, Slovenia, South Korea, Switzerland, and

4095-589: The Grand Coalition, they were not each other's closest allies, although they did vote with each other about two-thirds of the time. IND/DEM did not have close allies within the political groups, preferring instead to cooperate most closely with the Non-Inscrits . During the fifth term the ELDR Group were involved in a break in the grand coalition when they entered into an alliance with the European People's Party, to

4186-403: The Group in the Parliament's Conference of Presidents), and Groups receive a staff allocation and financial subsidies. Majorities in the Parliament depend on how Groups vote and what deals are negotiated among them. Although most of the political groups in the European Parliament correlate to a corresponding political party, there are cases where members from two political parties come together in

4277-571: The Netherlands met in Luxembourg and founded the European People's Party . In 1992, Section 41 of the Treaty of Maastricht added Article 138a to the Treaty of Rome . Article 138a (the so called party article ) stated that "Political parties at European level are important as a factor for integration within the Union. They contribute to forming a European awareness and to expressing the political will of

4368-636: The PES. The EPP demanded that if Buttiglione were to go, then a PES commissioner must also be sacrificed for balance. In the end, Italy withdrew Buttiglione and put forward Franco Frattini instead. Frattini won the support of the PES and the Barroso Commission was finally approved, albeit behind schedule. Politicisation such as the above has been increasing, with Simon Hix of the London School of Economics noting in 2007 that Our work also shows that politics in

4459-597: The Santer Commission . When the initial allegations against the Commission Budget emerged, they were directed primarily against the PES Édith Cresson and Manuel Marín . PES supported the commission and saw the issue as an attempt by the EPP to discredit their party ahead of the 1999 elections. EPP disagreed. Whilst the Parliament was considering rejecting the Community budget , President Jacques Santer argued that

4550-870: The United Kingdom, the enlarged Socialist congress met in Bonn and inaugurated the Confederation of the Socialist Parties of the European Community . In March 1976, the Federation of Liberal and Democrat Parties in Europe was founded in Stuttgart by parties from Denmark, France, Germany Italy, Luxembourg, and the Netherlands. A few months later, in July, party representatives from Belgium, France, Germany, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, and

4641-521: The United States, among many others. European political party A European political party , known formally as a political party at European level and informally as a Europarty , is a type of political party organisation operating transnationally in Europe and within the institutions of the European Union (EU). They are regulated and funded by EU Regulation 1141/2014 on

SECTION 50

#1732884089817

4732-544: The activities of European parties and foundations starting with the financial year 2018. Since then, applications for public funding are placed with the APPF, but decisions on funding remain with the European Parliament. In May 2018, the European Parliament and the Council adopted Regulation 2018/673, which amended Regulation 1141/2014 by detailing provisions relating to the registration of political parties and foundations, and transparency regarding political programmes and party logos. Among others, Regulation 2018/673 introduced

4823-560: The actual election result. Table 3 of 21 August 2008 version of working paper by Hix and Noury gave figures for the level of cooperation between each group (how many times they vote with a group, and how many times they vote against) for the Fifth and Sixth Parliaments. The results are given in the tables below, where 0% = never votes with, 100% = always votes with. EUL/NGL and G/EFA voted closely together, as did PES and ALDE, and EPP-ED and UEN. Surprisingly, given that PES and EPP-ED are partners in

4914-546: The adjacent diagram with the horizontal scale scaled so that −100% = totally against and 100% = totally for. The results are also given in the table below, rescaled so that 0% = totally against, 100% = totally for. G/EFA and PES were in favour of such a tax, IND/DEM and the Independents were definitely against, the others had no clear position. National media focus on the MEPs and national parties of their own member state, neglecting

5005-420: The citizens of the Union", thus officially recognising the existence of European political parties. In 1997, the Treaty of Amsterdam established who should pay for expenditure authorised by the party article (renumbered Article 191). This provided a mechanism whereby European parties could be paid out of the budget of the European Union, and European parties started to spend the money. Such expenditure included

5096-417: The debate on European issues, organising conferences, and carrying out research, and linking like-minded national political foundations. Finally, the revised regulation explicitly allows European parties to finance campaigns conducted for elections to the European Parliament. In October 2014, the European Parliament and the Council adopted Regulation 1141/2014, which replaced Regulation 2004/2003 and overhauled

5187-436: The decision of the European Commission to opt for the recast method, which effectively limits discussions to the provisions of the Regulation which the Commission has decided to modify and prevents a wider review of the Regulation. In March 2022, the Council of the European Union adopted a political agreement (its own negotiating position). In July 2022, the European Parliament's AFCO Committee adopted its own position, which

5278-500: The dominant schools of European political thought and are the primary actors in the Parliament. The first three Groups were established in the earliest days of the Parliament. They were the "Socialist Group" (which eventually became the S&;D group ), the "Christian Democrat Group" (later EPP group ) and the "Liberals and Allies Group" (later Renew Europe ). As the Parliament developed, other Groups emerged. Gaullists from France founded

5369-510: The elections, some of them designate their preferred candidate (known as Spitzenkandidat or lead candidate) to be the next President of the European Commission . The work of European parties can be supplemented by that of an officially affiliated European political foundation ; foundations are independent from European parties and contribute to the public debate on policy issues and European integration. European parties' counterparts in

5460-552: The exclusion of the Party of European Socialists. This was reflected in the Presidency of the Parliament with the terms being shared between the EPP and the ELDR, rather than the EPP and PES as before. However, ELDR intervention was not the only cause for a break in the grand coalition. There have been specific occasions where real left-right party politics have emerged, notably the resignation of

5551-489: The financial interests of the Union. For "quantifiable infringements", the financial sanction ranges from 100 to 300% of the irregular sums received or not reported, up to a maximum of 10% of the party's annual budget. In October 2023, the APPF sanctioned the Identity and Democracy Party for "intentionally providing incorrect information about its board composition to the public". The financial sanction applied amounted to 5% of

SECTION 60

#1732884089817

5642-417: The first official definition of European political parties and created a framework for their public funding. This framework provided that, out of a total envelope for European parties, 15% would be distributed equally (the lump sum), and 85% would be distributed in proportion to each party's number of members of the European Parliament (MEP-based funding). Additionally, public funding could not exceed 75% of

5733-441: The following conditions regarding European parties' governance: European political parties are mostly made up of national member parties. Additionally, European citizens can become individual members of some European parties, depending on the provisions of those parties' statutes. The count of MEPs for the purpose of European public funding is separate from the question of individual membership, as MEPs are considered "members of

5824-424: The formation of ITS were unsuccessful, but ITS were blocked from leading positions on committees, when members from other Groups declined to vote for their candidates, despite a previous tradition of sharing such posts among members from all Groups. These events spurred MEPs, mainly from the largest two groups, to approve a rise in the threshold for groups to its current levels, having previously been even lower. This

5915-544: The formation of parliamentary groups like Centre-right coalition and Centre-left coalition . In the Swiss Federal Assembly , at least five members are required to form a parliamentary group. The most important task is to delegate members to the commissions. The parliamentary groups are decisive in Swiss Federal Assembly and not the political parties, which are not mentioned in the parliamentary law. In

6006-471: The formation of parliamentary groups running in elections. The parliamentary groups of the European Parliament must consist of no less than 25 MEPs from seven different EU member states . No party discipline is required. Parliamentary groups gain financial support and can join committees. Hungarian mixed-member majoritarian representation rewards the formation of parliamentary groups, like United for Hungary . Italian parallel voting system rewards

6097-467: The framework for European political parties and foundations, including by giving them a European legal status. It also established the Authority for the European political parties and European political foundations (APPF), a standalone entity for the purpose of registering, controlling, and imposing sanctions on European parties and foundations. Regulation 1141/2014 applied as of 1 January 2017, and covered

6188-469: The funding of European parties from non-EU national parties (which, following Brexit, meant that political parties in the UK could no longer finance European parties), broaden the categories of private funding, decrease European parties' co-financing rate, and simplify accounting procedures. In November 2021, the European Commission proposed a text for a new regulation aimed at replacing Regulation 1141/2021, using

6279-465: The funding of national parties, an outcome not originally intended. In June 2000, the European Court of Auditors considered that the funding of European political parties should not be carried out using appropriations made for political groups in the European Parliament , as had long been the case. This decision led the 2001 Treaty of Nice to add a second paragraph to Article 191 of the Treaty on

6370-421: The group's activities and poorly understanding their structure or even existence. Transnational media coverage of the groups per se is limited to those organs such as the Parliament itself, or those news media (e.g. EUObserver or theParliament.com ) that specialise in the Parliament. These organs cover the groups in detail but with little overarching analysis. So although such organs make it easy to find out how

6461-576: The most united groups, with EDD the most disunited. The March 2006 edition of Social Europe: the Journal of the European Left included a chapter called "Women and Social Democratic Politics" by Wendy Stokes. That chapter gave the proportion of female MEPs in each Group in the European Parliament. The results for each Group are given in the adjacent diagram. The horizontal scale denotes gender balance (0% = totally male, 100% = totally female, but no Group has

6552-466: The new Group did not, by its own admission, meet the requirement for political affinity. This decision was challenged at the CJEU , which found in Parliament's favour. Further questions were asked when MEPs attempted to create a far-right Group called " Identity, Tradition, Sovereignty " (ITS). This generated controversy and there were concerns about public funds going towards a far-right Group. Attempts to block

6643-587: The nomination of Rocco Buttiglione as European Commissioner for Justice, Freedom and Security . The EPP supported the appointment of Buttiglione, while the PES, who were also critics of the President-designate Jose Manuel Barroso , led the parties seeking Buttiglione's removal following his rejection (the first in EU history ) by a Parliamentary committee . Barroso initially stood by his team and offered only small concessions, which were rejected by

6734-541: The outset of legislative terms, with another peak around the half-term moment, when responsibilities rotate within the EP hierarchy. The political groups of the European Parliament have been around in one form or another since September 1952 and the first meeting of the Parliament's predecessor, the Common Assembly. The groups are coalitions of MEPs and the European parties and national parties that those MEPs belong to. The groups have coalesced into representations of

6825-424: The parliamentary and organisational leadership will be held by the same person or people, whether ex officio or not; other parties maintain a sharp distinction between the two offices. Nevertheless, in almost all cases, the parliamentary leader is the public face of the party, and wields considerable influence within the organisational wing, whether or not they hold any official position there. A parliamentary group

6916-415: The party is not represented in the legislature for the time being, the leader will often be put forward at a general election as the party's candidate for their most winnable seat. In some parties, the leader is elected solely by the members of the parliamentary group; in others, some or all members of the wider party participate in the election. Parliamentary groups often have one or more whips , whose role

7007-487: The party's annual budget, or €47,021. As of October 2024 , there are twelve European political parties registered with the APPF: The entities below were formerly registered with the APPF. The entities below qualified at some point for European public funding; however, they were never registered with the APPF. In addition to the registered European political parties, many other entities are politically active at

7098-424: The period 2004–2009 were: Some of the groups (such as the PES and S&D Group) have become homogeneous units coterminous with their European political party, some (such as IND/DEM) have not. But they are still coalitions, not parties in their own right, and do not issue manifestos of their own. It may therefore be difficult to discern how the groups intend to vote without first inspecting

7189-554: The previous European Parliament ran from 2004 and 2009. It was composed of the following political groups. Table 3 of the 3 January 2008 version of a working paper from the London School of Economics/Free University of Brussels by Hix and Noury considered the positions of the groups in the Sixth Parliament (2004–2009) by analysing their roll-call votes. The results for each group are shown in the adjacent diagram. The vertical scale

7280-512: The purpose of the group, the values that it stands for and the main political objectives which its members intend to pursue together. The requirement of political affinity was put to the test in July 1999, when a varied group of non-attached members, ranging from the liberal Bonino List in Italy to the French National Front , tried to create a new “Technical Group”, but Parliament decided that

7371-417: The relevant European Parliament Rule of Procedure. This lays down the minimum criteria a Group must meet to qualify as a Group. The numerical criteria are 23 MEPs (at 3.3 percent, a lower threshold than in most national parliaments) but they must come from at least one-quarter of Member States (so currently at least seven). They must also share a political affinity and submit a political declaration, setting out

7462-510: The rest broadly in favour. Opinion was wider on the CFSP , with different divisions on different issues. Unsurprisingly, G/EFA was far more in favour of Green issues compared to the other groups. Table 1 of an April 2008 discussion paper from the Centre for European Economic Research by Heinemann et al. analysed each Group's stance on a hypothetical generalised EU tax. The results for each Group are given in

7553-435: The rules regarding their funding." The reference to "Article 251" refers to the co-decision procedure , which involves both the European Parliament and the Council as co-legislators. In November 2003, the European Parliament and the Council of the European Union adopted Regulation 2004/2003 "on the regulations governing political parties at European level and the rules regarding their funding". Regulation 2004/2003 provided

7644-462: The seats together. The PES were the largest single party grouping up to 1999, when they were overtaken by the centre-right EPP. In 1987 the Single European Act came into force and, under the new cooperation procedure , the Parliament needed to obtain large majorities to make the most impact. So the EPP and PES came to an agreement to cooperate in the Parliament. This agreement became known as

7735-449: The small subset of the electorate represented by party members. In any case, the exigencies of government, the need to cooperate with other members of the legislature and the desire to retain the support of the electorate as a whole often preclude strict adherence to the wider party's wishes. The exact relationship between the parliamentary party and the party varies between countries, and also from party to party. For example, in some parties,

7826-524: The statute and funding of European political parties and European political foundations, and their operations are supervised by the Authority for European Political Parties and European Political Foundations (APPF). European political parties – mostly consisting of national member parties, and few individual members – have the right to campaign during the European elections , for which they often adopt manifestos outlining their positions and ambitions. Ahead of

7917-445: The vast majority of European parties' income. For instance, the comparison of maximum allocations and final amounts of public funding for the year 2021 was as follows: With regards to private funding, European parties mostly receive financial contributions from their national member parties, which, in turn, almost always receive public funding from Member States. Donations from legal persons and, especially, from individuals only play

8008-633: Was endorsed by the Plenary in September 2022. Trilogues between the European Parliament, Council of the European Union, and European Commission took place in September, October and November 2022, and in March 2023, but did not reach an agreement. Article 3 of Regulation 1141/2014 lists the following criteria for an entity to register as a European political party with the APPF: Additionally, Article 4 imposes

8099-608: Was later detailed by the Decision of the Bureau of the European Parliament of 29 March 2004 and amended by Regulation 1524/2007. In particular, Regulation 1524/2007 clarified the funding framework and changed the co-financing rate, allowing public funding from the general budget of the European Union to reach 85% of European parties' reimbursable expenditure. This change meant that European parties were only requested to provide 15% in private co-financing. Regulation 1524/2007 also allowed European parties to set up affiliated European political foundations , separate entities contributing to

8190-457: Was opposed by many MEPs, notably from smaller Groups but also from the Liberal Group, arguing that it would be detrimental to democracy, whilst supporters argued that the change made it harder for a small number of members, possibly on the extremes (including the far right), to claim public funds. Groups may be based around a single European political party (e.g. the European People's Party ,

8281-410: Was unable to pursue a secessionist agenda there (it's out of the Parliament's purview) and pursued a right-wing agenda instead. This resulted in the secessionist subgroup being less Eurosceptic in terms of roll-call votes than other, non-eurosceptic parties. UKIP (the major component of the secessionist subgroup) was criticised for this seeming abandonment of its Eurosceptic core principles. Table 2 of

#816183