Wednesday

29th Jun 2022

Opinion

Bad news for democracy

Swedish think-tank Timbro have this week made a much welcome appeal to the Swedish EU presidency to highlight the EU's growing use of propaganda and to take a first step towards reversing it.

Back in December 2008, Open Europe, an independent think-tank with offices in London and Brussels, published the fruits of many months of investigation into the EU's unwieldy budget and concluded that it was spending more than €2.4 billion a year on a wide variety of efforts to promote European integration.

Read and decide

Join EUobserver today

Become an expert on Europe

Get instant access to all articles — and 20 years of archives. 14-day free trial.

... or subscribe as a group

  • EU spends millions to promote European integration (Photo: European Parliament)

This includes everything from straightforward advertising – with posters, leaflets, EU merchandise and so on – to more subtle attempts to convince people of the merits of "ever closer union" through cultural, educational and citizenship initiatives.

The EU has a remarkably sophisticated machine in operation to "sell" EU integration at every possible opportunity, complete with its own "Communication Department," and an impressive budget for funding hundreds of outside organisations which are supportive of the EU cause.

Without doubt, there is a clear need for citizens to become better educated about the European Union and what it does – especially given the fact that, as the European Parliament has confirmed, EU legislation is now at the root of the majority of laws enacted in its member states.

But the European Commission – and no doubt far too many MEPs – still do not understand the difference between providing much-needed information and "selling" the EU.

The innocuous-sounding pamphlet "How the European Union works," for example, emotively describes the EU as "a remarkable success story." And it is very deliberate. The commission even admits in its own policy documents that: "Neutral factual information is needed of course, but it is not enough on its own."

Up in gear

Recently, with the multiple rejections of EU integration seen in several referendums, the EU's propaganda effort has stepped up a gear.

Controversially, the European Commission now sees itself not just as "guardian of the Treaties," but as a political campaign group.

Following the Irish rejection of the Lisbon Treaty last year, the commission sent what it called an "unofficial" document to the media in Ireland, which suggested that the vote was the result of "a growth in readership and distribution of Eurosceptic British press" in Ireland.

The commission does not have a mandate to comment on the content of newspapers or on what Irish people read – so what justification is there for this kind of interference?

Similarly, following the publication of Open Europe's research on EU communication policy, Margot Wallstrom's office sent a highly-charged press release to the Swedish media, caricaturing the think-tank as being "to the right of the British Conservatives."

They also told the office of one Swedish MEP that the think-tank is run by the UK Independence Party, which campaigns for Britain's withdrawal from the EU. None of this is true, and is therefore nothing short of slander. Margot Wallstrom's office knew that such a description would be poison to Swedish ears.

It is also pretty ironic, given that part of our book criticises the commission for doing just this – sending out politically-charged press releases to specifically targeted sections of the press.

And it's not just the commission. In the wake of the recent expenses scandal, Dermot Scott, the head of the European Parliament's "information office" in London, wrote an article for the Guardian newspaper in which he tried to defend the EP's hugely controversial system of awarding allowances.

There is no justification at all for civil servants and officials, paid from the public purse, to take such strong and public political positions – especially on issues of such controversy.

It would have been unthinkable, for example, for an information officer at the House of Commons to write an article in a newspaper defending the expenses claimed by Westminster MPs. That's a job for elected politicians, not bureaucrats.

Bad news for democracy

All this has nothing to do with "trying to reach out to citizens" and "inform them about EU policies" – which is what the EU claims its multi-million Communications Policy is about – and everything to do with trying to control its image and limit dissenting voices.

The EU has even talked about moving to control the EU's image on the internet. Referring to the blogosphere, the commission has lamented the fact that: "Because of the many different sources of No campaigners on the internet, classic rebuttals are made impossible."

The European Parliament's Culture Committee subsequently voted for a report which proposed that the EU should regulate blogs – a proposal which was eventually watered down, but nonetheless indicates a very worrying trend.

All this is bad news for democracy. It is also an unacceptable use of public money – the use of taxpayer funds for government advertising is often strictly regulated at the national level, for instance in the UK, where "information" must be clearly distinguished from "advertising."

Why does all of this matter? It is more relevant than ever as we move into the next campaign for the Irish referendum on the Lisbon treaty.

Much scorn is poured on those groups which privately fund themselves to fight against the enormous EU propaganda machine and try to offer alternatives to "ever closer union." But rarely does anybody question the EU's huge Yes budget, which provides a continuous feed into the population and the media, not only at times of a referendum, but constantly and permanently.

With so much public money at their disposal, the EU institutions are able to propel their own vision of the future of Europe, and also begin to create a monopoly over what should be regarded as the "facts." The institutions claim to want a wider debate on Europe, but by trying to suppress those who do not support their vision, they are stifling debate.

Next time you see a poster or a website championing EU integration – the idea that more and more decisions should be made at the European level – ask yourself: should I really be paying for this?

Lorraine Mullally is Director of Open Europe

Disclaimer

The views expressed in this opinion piece are the author's, not those of EUobserver.

The euro — who's next?

Bulgaria's target date for joining the eurozone, 1 January 2024, seems elusive. The collapse of Kiril Petkov's government, likely fresh elections, with populists trying to score cheap points against the 'diktat of the eurocrats', might well delay accession.

Column

One rubicon after another

We realise that we are living in one of those key moments in history, with events unfolding exactly the way Swiss art historian Jacob Burckhardt describes them: a sudden crisis, rushing everything into overdrive.

Expect Czech EU presidency to downgrade V4 priorities

The Czech Republic is already in the throes of an extremely difficult period — several waves of Covid, high inflation, energy fears, an influx of Ukrainian refugees and a Prague corruption scandal. Now it has the EU presidency.

How to enhance EU cybersecurity

The Hungarian hacking allowed Russian intelligence to read 'over the shoulder' of an EU member state for an extended period of time. The difficulty for the EU is that it's not one nation, but a combination of 27 cybersecurity policies.

Column

China's support for Russia challenges Europe's Peace Order

China's soft support to Russia is deeply troubling for Europe. Here is the EU's biggest trading partner signalling that it is on the side of Russia, its aggression, and its challenge to the post-war international order.

Sturgeon's 2023 'referendum' gamble for Scotland

The independence campaign launch featured a new Scottish government report, comparing the UK's economic and social record with those of other European states — and arguing, unsurprisingly, that Scotland should be independent as a result.

News in Brief

  1. New president for European Committee of the Regions
  2. Gas flows from Spain to Morocco, after Western Sahara row
  3. BioNTech, Pfizer test 'universal' coronavirus vaccine
  4. UK sanctions second-richest Russian businessman
  5. Hungary permits emergency supervision of energy firms
  6. Bulgaria expels 70 alleged Russian spies
  7. EU Commission told to improve CAP data analytics
  8. Scotland pushes for second independence vote in 2023

Stakeholders' Highlights

  1. Nordic Council of MinistersEmerging journalists from the Nordics and Canada report the facts of the climate crisis
  2. Council of the EUEU: new rules on corporate sustainability reporting
  3. Nordic Council of MinistersNordic ministers for culture: Protect Ukraine’s cultural heritage!
  4. Reuters InstituteDigital News Report 2022
  5. EFBWW – EFBH – FETBBHow price increases affect construction workers
  6. Nordic Council of MinistersNew Nordic think tank examines influence of tech giants

Latest News

  1. Nato expands and reinforces on Russian flank
  2. EU Commission says it cannot find messages with Pfizer CEO
  3. EU ministers sign off on climate laws amid German infighting
  4. EU presidency still looking for asylum relocation pledges
  5. Finland and Sweden to join Nato, as Erdoğan drops veto
  6. The euro — who's next?
  7. One rubicon after another
  8. Green crime-fighting boss urgently required, key MEP says

Join EUobserver

Support quality EU news

Join us