The EU is going through an existential crisis. Support for the EU is at an all-time low across a swathe of Member States. The campaigns for the forthcoming European Parliament elections (22-25 May) have represented an important opportunity for current and candidate MEPs to explain to citizens what the EU is and does, and the benefits of membership. But has that opportunity been squandered? FTI Consulting examine the results of some proprietary research conducted at how successful MEPs have been in communicating about the EU in the run up to the elections.

1. Strategic Communications
SNAPSHOT
EU Elections – MEPs & constituent communication
16 May 2014
CRITICAL THINKING AT THE CRITICAL TIME™
The EU is going through an existential crisis. Support for
the EU is at an all-time low across a swathe of Member
States. The campaigns for the forthcoming European
Parliament elections (22-25 May) have represented an
important opportunity for current and candidate MEPs to
explain to citizens what the EU is and does, and the
benefits of membership. But has that opportunity been
squandered? In the 7th in our series of FTI Consulting
snapshots on the European elections, we examine the
results of some proprietary research conducted at how
successful MEPs have been in communicating about the
EU in the run up to the elections.
FTI Consulting conducted two surveys to evaluate the
communication efforts of MEPs on specific issues, with the
purpose of benchmarking and comparing how answers
evolved over five months. We surveyed respondents across
Germany, France, Poland, Spain and the UK, representing
around 297m of 508m EU citizens, represented by 351 MEPs.
Communicating the EU
Overall the results of the poll are sobering: more than 50% of
respondents thought that their MEPs’ communication was
ineffective overall, with the situation stagnating or even
deteriorating between October 2013 and April 2014. Poland
was the only exception, where there was a slight improvement
in the perception of MEPs’ communications.
How well would you generally rate the effectiveness of your MEPs
communication on the following in the last 12 months: Overall?
When asked about the effectiveness of MEP communication
on specific subjects, for example on the benefits of the EU to
each of the countries, the picture changes only slightly. The
most striking finding is that in Germany the proportion of
respondents perceiving MEP communication on this subject to
be ineffective rose from 39% to 52%.
How well would you generally rate the effectiveness of your MEPs
communication on the following in the last 12 months: Benefits of the EU to your
country?
Again, in rating the effectiveness of MEP communication on
data protection, one of the most controversial subjects
currently debated in Europe, in all countries bar Poland
respondents expressed a more negative opinion in April 2014
than in October 2013. Indeed Poland markedly bucked the
trend here, where in October 2013 only 27% believed their
MEPs’ communication on this subject to be effective,
compared to the 44% who believed so in April 2014.
How well would you generally rate the effectiveness of your MEPs
communication on the following in the last 12 months: Data privacy?
With the notable exception of Poland, the impression is that
MEPs’ communication to citizens on key EU issues has
worsened during the election campaign. Perhaps somewhat
predictably, views are particularly negative in the UK and
France (where we have witnessed the rise of UKIP and the
Front National respectively). Even in Germany, which has the
largest and strongest EU economy, perceptions of how MEPs
have communicated the benefits of the EU are poor.
Negative campaigning
This may be due to by the fact that the major national political
parties tend to spend less on European election campaigns
than on in national elections1, whereas Eurosceptic parties
tend to spend more in EP than national elections.
Clearly, incumbent MEPs have not taken the opportunity the
election campaign has afforded to effectively communicate the
EU to their electorates, especially on issues of fundamental
importance to the EU and its future. It is then no surprise that
1 FAZ, 19 April: Parteien verdienen prächtig am Europawahlkampf
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Oct-13
Apr-14
Oct-13
Apr-14
Oct-13
Apr-14
Oct-13
Apr-14
Oct-13
Apr-14
UK GermanyFrance Spain Poland
Don't know
Very or
slightly
ineffective
Very or
slightly
effective
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Oct-13
Apr-14
Oct-13
Apr-14
Oct-13
Apr-14
Oct-13
Apr-14
Oct-13
Apr-14
UK Germany France Spain Poland
Don't know
Very or
slightly
ineffective
Very or
slightly
effective
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Oct-13
Apr-14
Oct-13
Apr-14
Oct-13
Apr-14
Oct-13
Apr-14
Oct-13
Apr-14
UK GermanyFrance Spain Poland
Don't know
Very or
slightly
ineffective
Very or
slightly
effective

2. MEPs communicating the EU
CRITICAL THINKING AT THE CRITICAL TIME™
in such an information vacuum that the parties of the extreme
right and left have been filling the void with anti-EU rhetoric.
The domination of EU-bashing and demonization in EP
elections is felt strongly by the electorate, with an
overwhelming majority of respondents across all markets
surveyed in April 2014 agreeing that communication on the
election is on balance more about fearing the EU than about
the positive aspects of it.
Communication on the election is on balance more about fearing the EU than
the positive aspects of it.
The levels of perception of negative communication around
the EU correlate closely with levels of real concern expressed
about the effect of EU regulation on national economies.
Across all member states surveyed, more than 70% of
respondents said they were concerned EU regulations are
stifling the national economy.
I am concerned of the influence EU regulations have on holding back the
prosperity of my country’s economy.
Conclusions
It is clear that voters are not satisfied with the level or
effectiveness of communication from the MEPs on important
European and EU policy issues. A picture emerges of voters
who feel they have been somewhat abandoned by the
European Parliament’s political establishment. But there is a
clear hunger for more and better information from MEPs.
When asked whether there is anything MEPs or their political
parties could say or do that could influence their vote, a
majority of respondents answered in the affirmative; indeed,
70% of respondents in all countries stated that they are likely
to vote – a massive increase on the average European turnout
of 43% in the 2009 elections.
Is there is anything the MEPs or their political parties could say or do leading up
to this election that could influence your vote?
Undoubtedly there is a disconnect between the work of MEPs
in Brussels and the voters in the Member States. The complex
and sometimes intransparent decision making process, in
particular during the economic crisis, and the distance and
anonymity of the European institutions make it a real
challenge to explain the EU and its functioning to the
electorate. But while it may be different to sell the EU to its
citizens, the results of our survey demonstrate that there is not
only a pressing need to do so, but a desire from citizens for
information. It will always be difficult to bring Brussels closer to
EU citizens, but it seems from the results of our poll that the
perception of citizens is that incumbent MEPs have not even
tried to do so. Only by seriously addressing the concerns and
critical views of EU citizens and trying to explain the benefits
the EU brings to them will MEPs help to reinvigorate the
support for the EU. For the 2014 elections, they have left it too
late.
www.fticonsulting.com
©2014 FTI Consulting, LLP. All rights reserved.
Notes on the surveys
The first survey polled 1,500 respondents and was conducted 25-28 October 2013. The
second surveyed a much larger sample size of 14,897 respondents 04-09 April 2014,
Surveys were conducted in France, Germany, Poland Spain and the UK, 1,500 people
participated in the poll in October 2013. In April 2014 participated. Due to the smaller number
at the first poll we assume a margin of error of around 3-5%.
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Don't know
Slightly or
strongly
disagree
Strongly or
slightly agree
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Don't know
Slightly or
strongly
disagree
Strongly or
slightly agree
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
UK
Germ…
France
Spain
Poland
Yes and I am likely to vote No and I am likely to vote
Yes but I am unlikely to vote No but I am unlikely to vote
I will not be voting
Dan Healy
Managing Director, Head of Research EMEA
FTI Consulting
London, UK
+ 44 20 72 69 93 02
Dan.healy@fticonsulting.com
Arne Koeppel
Head of Research, Brussels
FTI Consulting
Avenue Marnix 23
1000 Brussels
+32 2 289 0939
Arne.Koeppel@fticonsulting.com
George Candon
Senior Director
FTI Consulting
Avenue Marnix 23
1000 Brussels
+32 2 289 0955
George.Candon@fticonsulting.com