Learning to Play the Game

It takes time to learn to play the political game successfully. Scholars have investigated whether MEPs become more pro-European over time. It has long been a supposition that time spent in the EU institutions will lead actors to adopt their core values, principally a more pro-European outlook (Beyers:2010, Shore:2000). However recent empirical studies of MEPs’ voting behaviour do not support this hypothesis (Scully:2005:5). Scully suggests MEPs get a lower dose of ‘Europe’ than assumed (2005:86) and others suggest the assumed experience MEP’s have has been misconceived (Bailer&Schneider:2000). We need to rethink our approach to socialisation to be able to explore what the ‘dose’ of Europe MEPs receive consists of. As Kauppi says, not all MEPs become federalists but ‘European political integration is also social and cultural integration. Spending time in Brussels changes the political habitus of politicians’ (2003:785). Beauvallet and Michon agree the EP functions as a socialisation environment; ‘MEPs can develop their knowledge and skills there, their beliefs, legitimate ways of operating that have progressively become necessary for those who wish to enter the institutional game, acquire its ‘practical sense’ (Bourdieu, 1998) and obtain the available ‘trophies’’ (2010:161).

I approach socialisation as the acquisition of the habitus as actors learn to operate in the field and play the game. This reflects Scully’s statement that MEPs are socialised as part of a learning process that facilitates goal achievement (2005:86). I asked the MEPs how they learnt to pursue their aims and interests here⁴⁶. All those asked said there was no or very little formal training provided and that MEPs learn on the job: ‘it really is sink or swim, straight in there’ (Interview-45). Some suggested it takes two years and others five to ‘really develop a sense for what's going on behind the scenes’ (Interview-32) and that firstly you have to learn your way around the labyrinthine building before you can even think about trying to influence proceedings (Interviews-18,32,27, Photos-12 below). Whilst some thought procedure training had been provided, none had attended it, and an MEP described how she did not know how to use the voting machine in her first plenary (Interview-52). Another MEP thought training on existing legislation by the committees would help them work more efficiently as few people arrive as EU legislation experts (Interview-27). A long-serving MEP said the groups are getting better at providing

46 Coghill et al (2012) compare support in over 30 parliaments, finding parliamentarians are given little time to prepare and lack sufficient training, leaving them ill-prepared for their role.

seminars, and although more could be done, ‘fortunately most MEPs have a lot of initiative otherwise they wouldn’t be here’ (Interview-18).

Photos 12:

Signs around the buildings (Brussels and Strasbourg)

MEPs must also get to grips with the formal tools available to them: questions (written and oral to the Commission and Council) (Proksch&Slapin:2011), motions for resolutions, written declarations, speeches, and reports. These are perceived to vary in prestige. An MEP described how written declarations can be extremely important outside of the EU to the countries involved (Interview-18). However another declared them ‘essentially pointless’ because they do not initiate a legislative procedure or force an answer from the Executive, but ‘serve as fig leaves’ for constituents. He initially over-estimated their value and under-estimated the value of plenary speeches. Here the Commission and Council are present so it is an opportunity to influence the other branches, but also plenary proceedings are shown in the press room and often MEPs have the TVs on in their offices, so everyone hears you. Speech footage can also be uploaded to the internet for domestic audiences. This is often done with ‘One Minute Speeches’, a tool recently added for MEPs to raise topics of political importance. However he said this gives MEPs the opportunity to say ‘something that has no place in the EU political arena, but is important to the individual’ (Interview-32).

It takes time to learn to play the game and acquire the habitus. An MEP explained:

‘The most important thing is to understand the culture of the place. Where some MEPs fail is when they believe they can do this with other jobs ... or that they can swan in at the time when you have to vote, but not need to spend very much time here otherwise. It is certainly true that when you’ve been here a while you can decide with a rather greater degree of knowledge how best to use your time. But if you don’t throw yourself in to it at the beginning then you never really understand what it’s about’ (Interview-18).

A 2009 newcomer described how the EP can at first feel overwhelmingly complicated but that it is easy to ‘get into’ the working culture by being active and then you can be involved in reports and affect issues. She said, ‘it’s just important to get in the groups and committees to make the breakthrough with other groups and other MEPs. The focus is like peer pressure in some cases’ (Interview-39). Meanwhile a long-serving MEP described how she had taken part in a French radio broadcast and ‘the journalist was fascinated because ...

you have not acted as French politicians, you have acted as MEPs. For a start you all listen to each other much more than if you were in France or Italy ... This is proof that we are all evolving’ (Interview-44).

MEPs learn to perform the co-operative style on the job and some described how they were thrown in from the start to grasp the politics and personalities in their own groups:

‘Learning how the politics works here, that was the most difficult bit. We did a resolution about agriculture in the first couple of weeks ... I don't know how I managed to escape unscathed, I think they might have taken pity on me because I was new… but that debate showed me where all the politics were and where the balance was, and who you had to make sure you’d picked off to make sure you had a majority’ (Interview-28)

‘When I was fairly new, I did a voting list on nuclear not realising that most people in ALDE ... were pro-nuclear. I did my little voting list and then had the embarrassment of having most ALDE people voting against me in the committee vote’ (Interview-29).

MEPs learn through experience and by getting involved in their committees, groups, and NPDs, and by getting to know people and issues, and seeing legislation passed. By asking questions in committee and plenary and submitting amendments to draft legislation, they learn how the process works formally and informally (Interview-39,45). The next step can be to become a rapporteur for a report (a piece of draft legislation), although as a co-ordinator explained, many MEPs have to be a shadow rapporteur⁴⁷ a few times first to show they will take it ‘sensibly’ (Interview-45) and new MEPs are usually given ‘easy’ reports first (Interview-52) - meaning less contentious or prestigious pieces of legislation.

From an organisational perspective, the extent to which institutions impinge upon peoples’

pre-established mind-sets, depends on how they are organized (Egeberg:2002). Whilst MEPs learn on the job (applying previous political and professional experience), their NPD and group supports them through this process. New MEPs usually ask other members of their NPD or group and their staff first for advice on reports in which they do not

47 See Chapter 1, Section 1.3.4 for definitions of these roles.

specialise (Interview-52). Likewise when I began the fieldwork internship the MEP’s assistant told me to call the other NPD offices if I had any questions.

As is explored throughout this thesis, the groups can be conceptualised as CoPs: collegial groups who share a domain of interest and interact to further this on an on-going basis because they find value in their interactions (Wenger et al:2002:4). CoPs play a key role in socialising newcomers, mediating between the habitus and self, introducing individuals to expectations for performances which will be supported and validated within the status hierarchy. They show newcomers the resources and attributes required for successful performances in the field (Wodak:2009:12,76). Learning occurs in context and knowledge is a matter of competence with respect to valued enterprises, and knowing is a matter of participating in the pursuit of enterprises (Wenger:1998:4).

MEPs learn on the job. They learn how to play the game by participating in it, in their committees and groups. However, their NPD and group support them. Some NPDs set up more formal procedures; for example in 2009 one NPD set up a mentoring system pairing new and returning MEPs (Interview-32). An MEP who started part way through the term described how she arranged coffees with her co-ordinator and most members of her NPD to seek their advice on how to get the most out of her time (Interview-52). An NI MEP who was moving into one of the groups described how surprised she was when the co-ordinator and policy advisors wanted to meet with her to support her work, something she had not previously experienced (Interview-54). Some of the MEPs described how helpful it had been for them to have had an experienced assistant who knew how the institution works, particularly the complicated administrative procedures but also political codes and practices (Interviews-45,28,39,52). Most interviewees learned by getting involved in their committees and group and getting to know the politics and personalities. Co-ordinators aid this process in the way they allocate reports and duties. MEPs routinely attend meetings with their NPD and group where information and advice are routinely shared, as is described throughout this thesis (Chapters 5-7). In this way they learn to play the game and pursue their aims successfully in this relatively autonomous transnational political field and its habitus.

4.6 Conclusion

This chapter has guided us into and introduced the social context in which MEPs practice politics, and in which the CoPs explored in the next chapters are embedded. I have argued that MEPs learn to play the political game in this field to pursue their aims and interests successfully. This is a fruitful approach to socialisation because it is an actor-focused and context-sensitive approach which provides access to motivations and resources and thus presents a nuanced understanding of MEP behaviour in this transnational space. This chapter has argued the EP is a relatively autonomous transnational field with a consensual, co-operative, and enabling habitus. It is described thus by those aiming to influence EU legislation and EP politics, who learn to play the game, acquire the habitus, and accumulate valid capital.

The following findings have been presented. Firstly, the EP can be conceptualised as a distinct and relatively autonomous transnational political field. Elite tastes and practices as well as perceptions of a lack of media coverage segregate members from citizens. The institutions are clustered within a small area of the city which provides everything this mobile group needs to function. Their ghettoisation is reinforced by their routines, practices, and codes. Secondly, the habitus is described as consensual, co-operative, and egalitarian. A consensual approach is reinforced and facilitated by the architecture which encourages co-operation and informal face-to-face interaction. Co-operation and consensus are achieved in the manner in which actors approach each other in everyday interactions. To successfully pursue an aim or interest here requires actors to embody the appropriate disposition, meaning personality - or the presentation of the self - is key to success.

Alliances are made and deals struck within small groups of MEPs who have accumulated capital, learnt to play the game, and whose lead is followed by non-expert MEPs. However not all MEPs are primarily trying to influence EU legislation and EP politics, and particularly eurosceptic MEPs can be understood to be playing different games and therefore have different stakes and strategies. The segregation of MEPs in Brussels coupled with the EP’s enabling culture means individuals have a high degree of freedom to pursue their aims in the bubble – if they learn to play the game. Whilst MEPs learn on the job and through experience and participation, they are supported and shown successful resources

and attributes and what performances will be supported here, by their NPD and group colleagues. The important role these CoPs play in supporting MEPs’ everyday practice of politics is explored throughout the rest of this thesis.

Chapter 5: