Archives: Election Hub

The Leaders Debate: Grayling Reacts

Two of Grayling’s senior advisory board, former Deputy Political Editor of Sky News, Joey Jones, and newly appointed Labour expert Tanya Joseph, discuss the fallout from yesterday’s debate between the two people vying to be the next Prime Minister.

Tune into their expert commentary and nuanced insights that go beyond the headlines. Don’t miss a thought-provoking conversation that will keep you informed and engaged in the political pulse of the nation.

Sunak targets the grey vote; Labour falters

| By Fiona Koh | 0 Comments

Sunak goes early

It has been 10 days since Rishi Sunak stood outside 10 Downing Street to announce a general election on 4 July. Sunak told us that he was a man with a plan – a message which fell rather flat as he stood in the pouring rain without an umbrella getting increasingly soaked.

If he had a plan, it quickly became clear that it was not one he had shared with colleagues. It soon emerged that the Conservative leader had told the King that he wished to call an election before he told the Cabinet. Conventionally the Prime Minister consults the Cabinet before seeking the formal permission of the monarch to dissolve Parliament.

There has been huge speculation as to why he decided to go now. News of a small decrease in inflation could certainly have spurred him on, an inkling that there would be no more good economic news for a while would have encouraged him, but it is equally likely he just didn’t want to carry on.

Going for the over-70s

While critics have characterised Sunak’s campaign strategy as being inspired by The Producers (the film in which two Hollywood producers deliberately try to produce a flop), it is probably more the case that his approach is informed by a very narrow reading of the Conservative Party’s private polls. These indicate that the over-70s are more likely to vote for him and, given that there are more older people in the population and they are more likely to vote than other age groups, it is not entirely foolish to find policies which appeal to them.

As a result, his two big announcements in the first week of the campaign are very much geared towards this group: national service for all 18-year-olds and commitments about protecting state pensions. And unsurprisingly the Conservatives have started the second full week of the campaigning talking about gender, or, more precisely, the definition of a woman. They know that this is a question to which none of the other parties have a coherent answer and that theirs is more aligned to the views of older voters, and indeed to many beyond.

Labour’s mixed start

Labour will be hoping that Sunak’s calculations are wrong and that older people do care about education, health, the economy, crime – all areas where it is polling better than the Conservatives.

Keir Starmer had a pretty good start to the campaign, with the party coming over as sensible, stable and trust-worthy, particularly when it comes to the economy. He is growing in confidence and understands that one of his main challenges is that the electorate don’t know him and that he needs to tell us a bit more about himself and his values.

However, the Labour campaign stalled badly after a row about whether veteran leftist Diane Abbott was or was not allowed to stand as a Labour candidate. The fact the row took attention away from policy announcements for several days is bad news for Labour and speaks to poor communications management. Instead of communicating the results of its lengthy inquiry into her behaviour clearly and quickly, the story leaked, Abbott was given the upper hand, and hapless members of the Labour team were giving interviews without knowing the actual position. More importantly, it allowed the Conservatives and media to ask whether Starmer really has control of his party.

While the Abbott row will blow over, Starmer will be all too well aware that the spectre of Jeremy Corbyn will continue to haunt him. A key element of its election strategy is to reassure voters that it can be trusted to protect the country and grow the economy – both areas on which it was perceived as weak during the Corbyn era – hence today’s focus on the UK’s nuclear deterrent and defence spending. Expect more, much more on the economy.

It has been a roller coaster so far and we are just at the beginning. Strap in, folks, it’s going to be a long campaign.

Please get in touch with alan.boyd-hall@grayling.com or tanya.joseph@grayling.com if you’d like to know more about Grayling’s Election Survival Kit for businesses.

EU elections: the view from Paris – French candidate programmes

| By Jessica Brobald | 0 Comments

On the 9th June 2024, the French will elect their representatives to the European Parliament, which currently has 705 members. The composition of the institution will increase to 720 elected members after these elections, reflecting demographic dynamics within the EU. Thanks to this re-evaluation, France will benefit from two additional seats, bringing its total to 81 MEPs (compared to 79 in the previous term).

In their report, the Grayling Paris team take a deep dive into the proposals of the candidate lists from across the whole political spectrum.

Click here to access the report.

Your country needs you: National service hits the headlines as politicians hit the streets

| By Fiona Koh | 0 Comments

Grayling Associate Director and former lead for the campaign to introduce voluntary, non-military national service in the UK, Leo Watson, reflects on the Conservative Party’s first major policy announcement of the 2024 General Election campaign.

A bit of controversy to start… love or loathe the brand, the UK needs a national service offer.

Indeed, it already has one in UK Service Year. The Government has been funding this voluntary and non-military national service offer over the last few years through its last flagship youth initiative, The National Citizen Service, which was set up as part of David Cameron’s doomed ‘Big Society’ project.

The vision is a bold one: ‘unlock the power of the next generation to help solve some of our toughest challenges, putting them into paid positions of work and helping communities where the needs are greatest’. It brings together organisations across the nation that have been providing full-time volunteering offers for decades, including Volunteering Matters, British Red Cross and City Year UK.

And why did the Government fund such a pilot? Well, because programmes in the UK and overseas (France, USA, Germany and many more) have proven to have a significant positive impact on their respective economies, social cohesion and social mobility. They have even provided a return on investment for the money those Governments have put in.

Frankly, national service is a no-brainer.

Yet, in my view, Sunday’s announcement of national service by Team Rishi will set this movement back years. And not just because it’s been announced by what appears to the final days of a faltering 14-year administration; it’s because they simply just don’t get it.

The key to a successful national service programme, fit the for 21^st century, are the two words: ‘voluntary’ and ‘non-military’. Whether intentional or otherwise (and the cynic in me thinks the former given Rishi’s love-bombing of the over 60s), when announcing a national service option with a side order of compulsory khaki and command, it’s always the military service that will lead the news. Cue rhetoric about how young people have lost their way, need toughening up and must learn the value of discipline.

These are nothing more than tired old tropes played out by every generation. The truth is that the majority of young people do want to serve their country. However, rather than being forced to take up arms and march in unison, they want to serve their country by supporting their schools, hospitals, care homes, museums, community groups and environment. Yes, what Team Rishi has announced would allow them to do that, but in a piecemeal way of one or two days at a time – which would significantly restrict their impact.

If I was advising Labour right now, I’d tell them to run with the idea… but to do it right.

Labour has been talking about ‘service’ for six months. It was only in January that they published their ‘Let’s Get Britain’s Future Back’ pamphlet, where Sir Keir’s own foreword proudly proclaimed that his mission-led Government would require the restoration of ‘an ethic of service’, describing this as ‘the hope of change and renewal allied to the responsibility of service’.

So, I challenge them to put their money where their mouth is.

Give people of all ages the opportunity to serve in civilian life, but for an unbroken 6-12 months, in a properly funded and branded programme, and in an area of their choosing. Reward the pioneers who take up the call with tuition debt relief, a pot of money to put towards skills development, and/or guaranteed job.

Indeed, it was a fairly successful centrist and true disciple of the ‘Third Way’, President Bill Clinton, who established the offer I’m proposing (AmeriCorps) in the States. Moreover, this was inspired by JFK’s Peace Corps, which to this day allows youngsters in the USA to serve on international development programmes. Quick sidenote, why is it that we are much more comfortable for young people to go abroad to serve than we are with allowing them to do this at home?

At a time when all the main parties in this election are struggling to create a vision and offer that will tackle our society’s significant challenges and unite a divided nation, surely a programme of voluntary, non-military national service is their answer?

Instead, Labour has seized upon the opportunity to bash the Conservatives for being out of touch and out of control with their spending commitments. As they look set to take power, the result is likely to be that a truly transformative initiative will have to wait at least another parliamentary cycle for lift off.

Another missed opportunity. And who are the losers? That’s the real blow… it’s you, it’s me and it’s just about the entire nation.

To speak to our Public Affairs team about how Grayling can support your organisation during the election campaign and beyond, contact leo.watson@grayling.com.

Poll of Experts – 2024-es magyarországi választások

| By Fiona Koh | 0 Comments

Választási előrejelzés és helyzetértékelés

Benedek István, Märcz Samu, Szászi Áron

Magyarországon két választást is rendeznek 2024. június 9-én, amelyeken a választók egyidejűleg választják meg az Európai Parlament magyar tagjait és az önkormányzati képviselőket. A jelenlegi politikai időszakot szokatlan turbulencia és példátlan események jellemzik. A februári kegyelmi-botrány nem csupán Novák Katalin lemondásához vezetett, hanem egyúttal jelentősen aláásta a Fidesz társadalmi támogatottságát is. Magyar Péter, a Fidesz egykori belső embere és a korábbi igazságügyminiszter, Varga Judit volt férje – aki szintén visszavonult a botrány következtében -, kihasználta a politikai lehetőséget, és nyilvános támadást intézve a kormányzó Fidesz ellen megalapította az új, TISZA (Tisztelet és Szabadság) elnevezésű pártját. A magyar EP-képviselőhelyek (21) pártok közötti megoszlása rendkívül bizonytalan, elsősorban a csapongó politikai események és a széttöredezett ellenzéki térfél miatt. A Grayling budapesti irodája ezért megkereste Magyarország vezető politikai szakértőit, hogy választási előrejelzést és helyzetértékelést készítsen, ezzel is segítve ügyfeleinket és partnereinket a jelenlegi turbulens politikai környezetben.

Módszertan

Jelen kutatásunk Magyarország vezető politikai elemzőinek, közvélemény-kutatóinak és társadalomtudósainak meglátásai alapján készült. Politikailag és szakmailag is diverz hátterű szakértőket kértünk fel a kérdőívünk kitöltésére. Fontos kiemelni, hogy elemzésünk nem az egyes politikai pártok népszerűségéről nyújt objektív felmérést, hanem a magyar politikai szakértők szubjektív értékelését aggregálja. Összesen tizenöt magyar politikai szakértő osztotta meg velünk várakozásait és értelmezte azokat az eseményeket, amelyek ezt az izgalmas kampányidőszakot alakították. Kérdőívünket hét elemző intézet politikai szakértői, négy akadémiai intézmény kutatói és két politikai újságíró töltötték ki. A felkért szakértők május 7-13. között vettek részt kutatásunkban.

Európai Parlamenti választások

Szakértőink szerint minden magyar párt és koalíció EP-képviselői helyeket fog veszíteni, kivéve a Magyar Péter által vezetett TISZA pártot. A szakértői becslések mediánja alapján a kormányzó Fidesz-KDNP várhatóan 3 képviselői helyet fog veszíteni, így 10 képviselőt küldhet majd az Európai Parlamentbe. A TISZA várhatóan 6 helyet fog szerezni, ezzel az ellenzéki tábor vezető pártjává válik. Érdemes kiemelni, hogy szakértő válaszadóink fele szerint a TISZA jelentősen átalakíthatja a magyar pártrendszert, sokan egy új, domináns ellenzéki pártként és Fidesz potenciális kihívójaként tekintenek rá.

A medián mandátumbecslések szerint a Demokratikus Koalíció, a Magyar Szocialista Párt és a Párbeszéd közös listája csupán három képviselőt küldhet az Európai Parlamentbe, ami kettővel kevesebb, mint amennyit ezek a pártok az előző, 2019-es EP-választáson szereztek. Az egyre kevésbé viccpártként működő Kétfarkú Kutya Párt és a szélsőjobboldali és erősen euroszkeptikus Mi Hazánk Mozgalom várhatóan az első képviselőit fogja az Európai Parlamentbe küldeni – a szakértők medián-véleménye mindkét pártnak 1-1 helyet jósol. Ezzel szemben a megkérdezett szakértők többsége szerint a liberális Momentum és a jobboldali Jobbik elveszíti jelenlegi (kettő, illetve egy) EP-képviselői helyeit. A 15 szakértő közül mindössze ketten számítottak arra, hogy a Momentum egy mandátumot szerez, míg a Jobbiktól egy szakértő sem várta, hogy az 5 százalékos küszöb fölé kerül. Csupán egy szakértő számított arra, hogy az LMP bejut az EP-be. A válaszadók egyharmada (5 szakértő) a közvélemény-kutatásokra alapozta várakozásait.

A Grayling magyar szakértőinek véleménye

Habár Magyarországon az infláció január óta 4% alatti szinten van, a gazdaság helyreállása lassabban halad a vártnál. A kormány 3,6%-ról 2,5%-ra csökkentette az éves GDP-növekedés előrejelzését és a költségvetési hiánycélt 2,9%-ról 4,5%-ra módosította, miközben 675 milliárd forint értékben halaszottak el kormányzati beruházásokat. A fogyasztói árak az utolsó választások óta 42%-kal, az élelmiszerárak pedig 67%-kal nőttek. Az EP-választások megmutatják, hogy a Fidesz képes lesz-e megőrizni pozícióit a megélhetési válság közepette, az EU-s forrásokból származó választási jóléti transzferek nélkül is. A pénzügyi nehézségek, a pedofília botrány által kiváltott morális felháborodás, valamint Magyar Péter által megfogalmazott „bennfentes vádak” veszélyes választási következményekkel fenyegetnek a Fidesz számára.

A magyar politikai rendszer szempontjából az európai választások legfontosabb kérdése, hogy létrejön-e egy olyan rendszerellenzék, amely képes hitelesen kihívni az Orbán-kormányt és annak ellenzékét is a választók tömegeinek szemében. Ez a fejlemény a jelenlegi domináns kormánypárt és széttöredezett ellenzék felállás helyett egy új kétblokk-rendszert eredményezhet – a 2000-es évekhez hasonlóan – a 2026-os parlamenti választásokra. Ez rendkívüli kockázatot jelentene a jelenlegi politikai rendszer stabilitására nézve.

Ezzel szemben a Fidesz számára az ellenzék széttöredezettségének konzerválására törekszik a régi baloldal, elsősorban a Demokratikus Koalíció, valamint az új, dinamikus TISZA párt kétoldali ellenzékiségére apellálva. Másrészt, ha a választásokon Magyar Péter új pártja legalább 5-6 EP mandátumot gyűjt össze, miközben más ellenzéki erők nem szereznek 1-2 mandátumnál többet, akkor olyan gravitációs erőként funkcionálhat a választások után, amely első számú kihívóként kétpólusúvá alakíthatja a pártrendszert, ezáltal radikálisan letisztíthatja az ellenzéki térfelet.

Jelenleg mindkét szcenárió elképzelhető, és rendkívül sok múlik a kampány további részén. Ugyanakkor a politikai rendszer egésze számára június 9-e után indul az új korszak, és a valódi változások iránya és mértéke 2026 tavaszára válik csak világossá.

Önkormányzati választások

A budapesti főpolgármester-választással kapcsolatosan szinte egyöntetű a szakértők véleménye. 11 válaszadó a hivatalban lévő Karácsony Gergely újraválasztására számít. Karácsony „harmadik utas” kihívójának, Vitézy Dávidnak a győzelme mellett mindössze 3 szakértő tette le a voksát. A Fidesz jelöltjének, Szentkirályi Alexandrának a győzelmére senki sem számított. Két elemző, aki Vitézy Dávid győzelmét tartotta valószínűnek, arra alapozta feltételezését, hogy Szentkirályi Alexandra visszalép.

Arra is megkértük a szakértőket, hogy válasszák ki, mely megyei jogú városokban várnak az önkormányzati választásokon szoros eredményeket. Válaszadóink mintegy kétharmada Eger, Miskolc, Győr és Szolnok városát tartja “csatatér körzetnek”. A szakértők fele Tatabányán, Nyíregyházán és Hódmezővásárhelyen számít szoros versenyre, míg harmaduk Szekszárdról és Bajáról gondolkozott hasonlóan. A 2019-es önkormányzati választásokon mindössze 7 megyei jogú városban volt szoros a verseny (a két első számú polgármesterjelölt közötti különbség 5% alatt volt). A szakértők válaszai azt mutatják, hogy ezekben a városokban az általános várakozás az ellenzéki pártok és a Fidesz közötti visszavágó. Miskolc és Hódmezővásárhely két olyan város, ahol 5 évvel ezelőtt az ellenzék könnyedén tudott nyerni, ezúttal azonban szoros verseny várható. Utóbbi városban Márki-Zay Péter, a közös ellenzék korábbi miniszterelnök-jelöltje, a hivatalban lévő polgármester indul az újraválasztásért.

A Grayling magyar szakértőinek véleménye

A párhuzamosan megrendezett két választásnak ellentétes politikai következményei lehetnek. Az EP-választás a magyar pártrendszert az egyszerűsödés irányába mozdíthatja el, és több párt felbomlásához vezethet, főként a centrumban és az ellenzék jobbszárnyán. Ezzel szemben az önkormányzati választások több politikai formáció számára a túlélést jelenthetik. Vitézy Dávid budapesti főpolgármester-jelöltsége az LMP pozícióját erősíti meg a fővárosban. A Momentum továbbra is jelen lehet a fővárosi közgyűlésben és más nagyobb települések önkormányzatában, továbbá a párt népszerű VI. kerületi polgármesterének, Soproni Tamásnak az újraválasztása is valószínűsíthető. A Kutyapárt számára a XII. kerület jelenthet nagy áttörést, ha a párt elnökének sikerül megnyernie a hegyvidéki polgármesteri versenyt.

A fővárosi városvezetés kevésbé lesz stabil a következő ciklusban – annak következményeként, hogy a Fidesz választási reformja arányossá tette a fővárosi képviselőválasztást. Habár Karácsony újraválasztására lehet számítani, a főpolgármester mögött álló baloldali koalíció és szövetségesei valószínűleg nem szereznek többséget a fővárosi közgyűlésben. Várhatóan a Fidesz mellett az LMP és a TISZA képviselői alkotnak majd ellensúlyt. A belső megosztottság és a “reálpolitika” felerősödése a fővárosi önkormányzatban még inkább kiábrándíthatja az ellenzéki szavazókat. Ugyanakkor, ha a városvezetés sikeresen tudja kezelni ezt a megosztottságot, akkor a 2026-os választások előtt a sikeres városvezetés a választók számára bizonyítékként szolgálhat az ellenzék kormányzóképességéről.

Magyar Péter sikeres országjárása nem csak a kormány iránti nagyfokú elégedetlenségre világított rá a középvárosokban és a vidéki Magyarországon, hanem az ellenzéki politika kínálati hiányára azokon a területeken, amelyekről az ellenzék lemondott, vagy ahova nem tudott erőforrásokat biztosítani. Ha az ellenzék ki tudja használni a jelenlegi elégedetlenségi hullámot, és átveszi több Fidesz vezette település vezetését, az jelentősen megváltoztathatja a magyarországi politikai hangulatot. A kormánypártok képesek lehetnek a választók szemében lekicsinyíteni a fontosságát néhány EP-képviselői hely elvesztésének. Ezzel egyidejűleg fontos polgármesteri pozíciók elvesztése azonban nagyobb politikai és kommunikációs kihívást jelentene a kormánypártok számára.

Hungary’s 2024 Elections: Poll of Experts

| By Fiona Koh | 0 Comments

Election forecast and situation analysis

By István Benedek, Samu Märcz, Áron J. Szászi

In Hungary, two elections are scheduled for June 9, 2024, where voters will simultaneously elect members of the European Parliament and municipal representatives. The ongoing political season has been marked by turmoil and unprecedented events. The February paedophilia scandal not only led to the resignation of President Novák but also significantly undermined public support for Fidesz. Former Fidesz insider Péter Magyar, ex-husband of former Justice Minister Varga (who also resigned due to the scandal), capitalised on the situation by launching a public attack against Fidesz and establishing his new TISZA party. The distribution of Hungarian MEP seats between parties is highly uncertain, primarily due to the rapid pace of political developments and the fragmentation of the opposition landscape. The Budapest office of Grayling has engaged experts of Hungarian politics to produce this forecast and situation analysis to help navigate our clients and partners through the turbulent political environment.

Methodology

Our analysis and forecast are informed by insights from Hungary’s leading political analysts, pollsters, and social scientists. We distributed our questionnaire to experts with diverse political affiliations and backgrounds. It is important to highlight that this study does not provide an objective measure of the popularity of different parties, but it is the aggregation of subjective evaluations of experts of Hungarian politics. 15 experts of Hungarian politics shared their expectations and gave us interpretations of the events that led to this exciting campaign season. Our survey was completed by experts of 7 think tank, academics of 4 institutions and 2 political journalists. Invited experts completed our questionnaire between May 7 and May 13.

European elections

Our experts expect all Hungarian parties and coalitions to lose MEP seats, except to the newly emerged TISZA party of Péter Magyar. Based on the median forecast, the governing Fidesz-KDNP is expected to lose 3 of their seats, sending 10 representatives to the European Parliament. TISZA is expected to gain 6 seats, becoming the strongest force in the opposition camp. It is worth highlighting that half of our respondents expect TISZA to significantly transform the Hungarian party system, with many viewing it as a new dominant opposition party and a potential challenger to Fidesz.

Median expert opinion suggest that the joint list of Democratic Coalition, Hungarian Socialist Party, and Dialogue will only have three representatives in the European Parliament. That would be two fewer seats than these parties were able to win in the last European elections. The satiric Two-Tailed Dog Party and the far-right and hard Eurosceptic Our Homeland are expected to be elected to the European Parliament for the first time. Median expert opinion forecasts 1 seat for each party. In contrast, the majority of surveyed experts expects the liberal Momentum and the right-wing Jobbik to lose their MEP seats. Out of the 15 experts, only two expected Momentum to win at least one seat, while none expected Jobbik to get above the 5% threshold. Only one expert expected that LMP will get elected to the EP. A third of the respondents (5 experts) based their expectations on opinion polls.

Grayling local experts’ view

Although inflation in Hungary has been below 4% since January, the economic recovery is slower than expected. The government revised its GDP growth forecast from 3.6% to 2.5%, changed its budget deficit target from 2.9% to 4.5% and postponed public investment of HUF 675 billion. Consumer prices has increased by 42% since the last election (food prices increased by 67%)². The EP elections will be a test of whether Fidesz will be able to held its position amidst a cost-of-living crisis without the electoral welfare measures that were previously enabled by access to EU funds. These financial difficulties together with the moral upheaval triggered by the paedophilia scandal and kept on the surface by Péter Magyar’s “insider allegations” carry dangerous electoral consequences for Fidesz.

The most important question regarding the European election for the Hungarian political system is whether a systemic opposition will emerge that can credibly challenge not only the Orbán government but also its opposition in the eyes of the electorate. With this development, the dominant governing party vs. the fragmented opposition could be replaced by a two-block political system, similar to that of the 2000s, by the time of the 2026 parliamentary elections. This would be extremely risky for the stability of the current political system.

Fidesz responded by aiming to keep the opposition fragmented, appealing to the survival of the old left, primarily the Democratic Coalition, alongside the new, dynamic TISZA party. On the other hand, if Péter Magyar’s new TISZA party wins at least 5-6 EP seats in the elections, while other opposition forces do not win more than 1-2 seats, it could function as a gravitational force after the elections, which could transform the party system into a bipolar one with TISZA as the main challenger, clearing the opposition field. Both scenarios are currently possible and much depends on the rest of the campaign. However, a new era for the political system will begin after 9 June, and the direction and extent of real change will only become clear in the spring of 2026.

Municipal elections

The expert opinion on the Budapest mayoral race is almost unanimous. 11 respondent expects the incumbent Gergely Karácsony to get re-elected, while only 3 people chose his third-party challenger, Dávid Vitézy to succeed. No one expected the Fidesz candidate, Alexandra Szentkirályi to win the race. Two analysts who expect Dávid Vitézy to win also expect Alexandra Szentkirályi to drop out of the race.

We also asked experts to choose which “cities with county rights” they expect to host competitive races. About two thirds of our respondents considered the cities of Eger, Miskolc, Győr and Szolnok to be competitive races in the municipal elections. About half of the experts expected tight races in Tatabánya, Nyíregyháza and Hódmezővásárhely, while third of them thought similarly about Szekszárd and Baja. In the 2019 municipal elections, only 7 cities (with county rights) saw close races, where the difference between the top two mayoral candidates were below 5%. Experts’ answers show that the general expectation is a rematch in these cities between the opposition and Fidesz. Miskolc and Hódmezővásárhely are two cities where the opposition could easily win 5 years ago, but a tight race is expected this time. In the latter city, Péter Márki-Zay, the joint opposition’s former PM candidate, is once again running for re-election as the incumbent mayor.

Grayling local experts’ view

On one hand, the EP election may drive the Hungarian party system toward simplification and lead to the dissolution of several parties, mainly in the centre and the right-wing of the opposition. On the other hand, the municipal elections can be a means of survival for several political formations. Dávid Vitézy’s nomination for Budapest mayor strengthens the green LMP’s position in the capital. The liberal Momentum may also be present in the Budapest city council and other larger municipalities, and get its popular mayor re-elected in the 6th district of Budapest. For the Dog Party, the 12th district could be a major breakthrough if the party’s president manages to win the local mayoral race.

The expected instability in the governance of Budapest results from Fidesz’s recent electoral reform making the voting for representatives to the city council proportional. Although the re-election of Mayor Karácsony is almost certain, the left-wing coalition behind the mayor and his allies are unlikely to get a majority in the City Council. Besides Fidesz, representatives of LMP and TISZA will form a counterbalance. Internal divisions and the intensification of “real politics” in Budapest could further disillusion opposition voters. At the same time, if the city administration can successfully manage this division, it could serve as an example of the opposition’s ability to govern for voters ahead of the 2026 elections.

Péter Magyar’s successful campaign tour shed light on the high level of dissatisfaction with the government in provincial towns and rural Hungary, highlighting the vacuum in opposition politics in areas where the opposition has either given up or been unable to allocate resources. If the opposition can capitalise on the current wave of dissatisfaction and takes over several Fidesz-led municipalities, it can drastically change the political mood in Hungary. While the governing parties might be able to downplay the loss of a few MEP seats, losing significant mayoral positions at the same time would present a greater challenge.

On the Move: A Pre-Election Snapshot of EU Transport Policy

| By Fiona Koh | 0 Comments

With the European elections on the horizon, Grayling Brussels is proud to present its first in a series of deep dives into the European Union’s transport policy landscape. This report offers a snapshot of the pivotal issues set to shape policy discussions during the next European mandate. Delving into legislative trends, party manifestos, and the influence of key MEPs, we provide a strategic overview of the key issues catching the attention of both MEP’s and voters alike.

Our analysis utilises cutting-edge data analytics tools and in-depth sectoral expertise to examine how transport and mobility policy is discussed across digital platforms, particularly focusing on key MEPs likely to drive the agenda forward following June’s elections. As we continue to monitor the election landscape, this report offers policymakers, industry leaders, and academics a detailed and engaging snapshot of what to expect in the European transport sector from 2024 to 2029.

What you will learn from the report:

- Notable absence of right-wing MEPs in online transport policy debates, hinting at different priority areas within their political agenda.
- Strong alignment among left-leaning to centre-right MEPs on transport and mobility priorities, including sustainability and infrastructure investment.
- Strategic shifts in focus towards emphasizing EU competitiveness and effective legislation implementation, harnessing digital platforms for policy influence, and aligning communication with environmental themes to enhance support.

Download the full report.

Winds of Change on the Emerald Isle: Election Year in Ireland

| By Jessica Brobald | 0 Comments

By Cameron Kelly | Brussels, European Union

The Irish political landscape has been almost exclusively dominated by either the centre-right Fine Gael or the centrist Fianna Fáil. That was until the general election of 2020 which saw support for republican-socialist Sinn Féin rise in light of a poorly functioning healthcare system, a worsening housing crisis and the soaring cost of higher education. As Europe inches closer to the European Elections in June, which will be closely followed by a general election in Ireland, what does this mean for Irish-EU relations and subsequently, the state-of-play of politics on the emerald isle?

2020 saw Sinn Féin emerge – for the first time in history – with the highest share of first preference votes (24.53%) with Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael trailing behind with 22.18% and 20.86%, respectively. Despite gathering the largest number of first preference votes, Sinn Féin – branded as left-wing populists – were left out of government when long-standing foes Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael, together with the Irish Green Party, formed a grand coalition.

Who are Sinn Féin?

Sinn Féin, historically associated with the Irish Republican Army (IRA) as its political wing, underwent a shift in perception during the 1990s, when both entities began to assert their distinct, and separate identities. Sinn Féin are the only large political party operating in both Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland. They are currently serving as the largest governing party in Northern Ireland and their primary goal is reuniting the 6 counties of Northern Ireland with the Republic, reflecting a blend of nationalist and republican ideologies. While the party aligns itself with democratic socialism, some cast doubt on its depiction as a strictly left-wing entity. Sinn Féin is currently lead by Mary Lou McDonald who is a strong critic of the EU’s foreign policy, particularly its position on the Israel-Palestine conflict and of European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen.

State-of-Play of politics in Ireland

On 20 March, Fine Gael’s Leo Varadkar made the surprise announcement he would step down as Taoiseach. Following a brief period of uncertainty, Simon Harris was appointed as his successor.

A well-established name in Irish politics, Harris served in several ministries since 2014 with mixed success, in particular during his tenure as health minister, before being named Ireland’s youngest-ever Taoiseach. Harris faces a tough challenge to impress and reassure voters of his party’s stability, and that of its coalition with Fianna Fáil, especially if these institutional parties intend to keep a surging Sinn Fein out of government by the time the next general election is held in 2025.

Campaigning begins

Current polls place Sinn Féin, once again, comfortably ahead of the pack in the run up to the elections. On 28 April, Sinn Féin launched its campaign for the EU and local elections and it is clear that leader Mary Lou McDonald is determined not to repeat the mistakes of the past, stating: “after the 2020 General Election; I couldn’t walk the length of myself without being told we didn’t run enough candidates. They stopped me in the street, at matches, at concerts, shouted it from car windows. […] Well, to you all, I present, Sinn Féin’s record number of candidates for the local and European elections. We are running our largest number of candidates and standing in every single electoral area.”

A Sinn Féin government and EU relations

McDonald has reinforced her belief that Ireland’s place is within the European Union but that the EU had moved in the wrong direction, choosing “militarisation over peace, privatisation over public services, big corporations over ordinary citizens and communities, power over partnership.” A heavy critic of the EU’s support of Israel, McDonald committed to defending Ireland’s longstanding neutrality against any perceived attempts by either the sitting Irish government or the European Commission to alter it. Referring to European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, McDonald stated that she had “showed her hand when she stood shoulder to shoulder with Israel as they committed slaughter and war crimes against the people of Gaza”, going on to say that President von der Leyen “did not stand for us. She did not speak for us. She never, ever will.”

A Sinn Féin government will likely have far reaching impacts on traditionally strong Irish-EU relations and will reflect a dramatic change in the direction of Irish politics. With Sinn Féin now the dominant governing party in Northern Ireland, a Sinn Féin government may also spell trouble for relations between the UK, Ireland, and the EU as they pursue their vision of a unity referendum between both jurisdictions on the island after over a century of division.

Maastricht Debate kicks off the European Elections with von der Leyen as clear frontrunner

| By Jessica Brobald | 0 Comments

By Jose Arroyo | Brussels, European Union

On 29 April, lead candidates for the European Elections gathered in in Maastricht to debate the future of the Green Deal, the EU’s security and defence policies, and European democracy. This first campaign event has set a markedly confrontational tone for the lead-up to the elections in June, with candidates trading barbs on the continuity of green policies, migration, and foreign interference. Incumbent Commission President Ursula von der Leyen emerged unscathed from the debate, and Greens candidate Bas Eickhout also put up a convincing performance. However, much of the campaign will depend on national issues and Ms von der Leyen’s future will not be known for sure until EU leaders and the new Parliament confirm their support for a second term.

Maastricht: first campaign stop

The debate, hosted by newspaper Politico and Studio Europa Maastricht, featured main European political parties’ candidates for the presidency of the European Commission. With the current European Parliament having held its final Plenary session the week prior, European politicians are now focussing on the campaign leading up to the election on 6-9 June. The vote will be a crucial moment in European politics, with 450 million citizens called to choose their representatives for the next five years.

Eight candidates took to the stage in the Dutch university town. Mainstream representatives include the centre-right Ursula von der Leyen (European People’s Party); the socialist Nicolas Schmit (Party of European Socialist); the liberal Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann (Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe); and Bas Eickhout, a Dutch MEP and co-lead candidate of the European Green Party.

Also present were Anders Vistisen, Danish MEP from the far-right Identity & Democracy Party; Walter Baier, an Austrian communist politician representing the European Left party. The debate also featured politicians from smaller parties such as the European Christian Political Movement and the European Free Alliance, a grouping of regionalist and separatist parties.

Candidates covered three broad themes: climate change, defence and security, and European democracy. Given that von der Leyen was the only candidate on stage to have a real chance to lead the next Commission, the debate often felt like a seven-vs-one. She was, nonetheless, more successful than others at getting her message across to the largely student audience, as was the Green’s Eickhout.

A Green Deal retrospective: how do we finance our future?

On climate change, von der Leyen defended her record, highlighting the 2050 decarbonisation objective set by her Commission. She described the Green Deal as a question of competitiveness and emphasised her willingness to work with the private sector to mobilise more funds. For his part, the socialist Schmit avoided direct criticism and called for more investments to implement the Green Deal.

Eickhout, on the other hand, accused von der Leyen of scapegoating green policies and using farmers’ protests as an excuse; he asked for a European investment fund to implement the Green Deal, in particular in transport and housing. The liberal Strack-Zimmermann proposed making reporting simpler for farmers but struggled to deliver a clear message. For his part, Vistisen slammed the Green Deal, accusing it of making Europeans poorer and moving jobs to China. He asked for market-ready solutions for the green transition instead of state-aid based models.

Defence & security: broad agreement on defence integration, division on migration

Candidates largely focused on the conflicts in Ukraine and the Middle East as well as migration. The sitting Commission President called for continued support for Ukraine and presented her vision for an integrated defence single market while respecting national competences on military issues. She also traded barbs with the hard-left Baier on Ukraine and Israel, with the latter forcing von der Leyen to say that an invasion of the Gazan city of Rafah by Israel would be unacceptable. She nonetheless remained non-committal on sanctions. The socialist and liberal candidates both spoke in favour of an integrated defence policy to avoid dependence on the USA. The far-right Vistisen attacked the EU for attempting a “power grab”, claiming the EU was trying to take away Member States’ and NATO’s powers on defence.

On migration, von der Leyen defended the recently-approved Migration Pact and said it will be Europeans – not smugglers – who will decide who enters the EU. In contrast, the Green’s Eickhout slammed the pact for lowering the standards on migrants’ rights. The far-right Vistisen called for a tough “Australian model” on migration to the EU. Finally, in addition to criticising the EU for not sanctioning Israel, the hard-left Baier called for a negotiated peace in Ukraine, which drew criticism from other candidates as they claimed this would amount to a Ukrainian surrender.

Democracy: foreign interference and shifting alliances in the spotlight

During a tense exchange, nearly all candidates on-stage accused the Identity & Democracy group of being infiltrated by Russian and Chinese spies, with many highlighting the recent arrest of a parliamentary assistant working for German MEP Maximilian Krah on suspicion that he was spying on China’s behalf. In lieu of a retort, the ID speaker Vistisen attacked his counterparts’ record, in particular the socialists for being involved in the Qatargate influence-peddling scandal.

Separately, in the clearest indication of what is now an open secret, Ms von der Leyen refused to commit to not cooperating with ECR, the hard-right European party home to Poland’s Law & Justice party and Italian prime minister Georgia Meloni’s Brothers of Italy, which notably refused to field a representative at the debate. The latest polls showing good results for ECR and the Commission President’s positive working relationship with PM Meloni seemed to have led her to leave her options open.

Preview for 27 national campaigns?

The debate in Maastricht provided a preview of what the EU election campaign will look like, with the Green Deal, security, and democracy being prominent themes across all Member States. Candidates revealed the fault lines that divide Europeans, and this will likely be reflected across Member States in June. However, it’s worth noting that for most European voters, the electoral campaign will be eminently national, with domestic politics and debates having a strong impact on the results.

While polls seem to indicate a shift to the right, the campaign has only just started. Ms von der Leyen still appears to be the frontrunner and she managed to avoid making any major mistakes in the debate. But her re-election will only be confirmed if European leaders renominate her after June 9, and if she gathers sufficient support in the newly composed European Parliament.

A roadmap for the next mandate? Takeaways from the Letta report

| By Jessica Brobald | 0 Comments

By Clara Piazza, Cameron Kelly & Charles Feld | Brussels, European Union

Responding to a request from the European Council back in June 2023, former Italian Prime Minister and President of the Jacques Delors Institute, Enrico Letta, presented his report on the future of the EU Single Market to heads of state and government on the 18th of April. His 146-page long study, entitled “Much more than a market”, is the result of over 400 meetings held in 65 European cities. In it, he assesses the EU’s strengths and weaknesses and presents a comprehensive plan to strengthen the block’s economic resilience in the face of global challenges. Recognising the EU’s past achievements, particularly the 4 freedoms (the free movement of goods, persons, services and capital), Letta calls for a better funded, more competitive, sustainable and integrated Single Market, which can be leveraged to promote the EU’s geopolitical interests. He also warns against excessive bureaucracy and highlights the need for reforms benefitting all EU citizens and businesses. His recommendations have been mostly welcomed by Member States, some mainstream political groups in the European Parliament and industry, although some civil society organizations appear to be more sceptical. So how disruptive is the Letta report? And could it influence debates ahead of the European elections and ultimately translate into policy?

Rethinking the purpose of the Single Market: Letta’s vision for the future

The body of the Letta report is divided into five sections.

The first addresses the issue of financing the EU’s strategic goals, focusing on fair, green, and digital transitions, EU enlargement, and enhanced defence capabilities. Letta details the need to mobilise both private and public resources effectively. To do so, he advocates for a Savings and Investments Union to integrate financial services within the Single Market, attracting private savings and additional resources. He also suggests balancing stricter enforcement of State aid at national levels with progressive EU-level funding support. In addition, he notably calls for the EU to enhance its industrial strategy to compete globally and to consider the creation of an EU Long-Term Savings Products, while enhancing frameworks for institutional investors like pension funds and insurance companies.

The second underlines the importance of scaling up the Single Market to tackle demographic changes and shifting economic patterns that are diminishing the EU’s global influence. To address the lagging performance of European companies compared to global counterparts, Letta suggests establishing a new EU executive agency to manage EU clean energy funding programs and incentive schemes. More generally, the report calls on the EU to address fragmentation, by further integrating, harmonising and consolidating (through strategic alliances) key sectors such as finance, energy, electronic communications, and defence. This uniform application is essential for safeguarding consumer rights and promoting innovation across all Member States.

The third part of the report is focused on sustainable growth. Letta notes that the Single Market is perceived to favour sectors, regions and groups with the means and skills to capitalize on cross-border opportunities. This perception, if unaddressed, poses a risk to public and political support critical to the Single Market’s success. To ensure greater cohesion, Letta recommends empowering citizens by for example promoting a “freedom to stay” alongside the freedom of movement. He also urges the EU to strengthen the social dimension of the Single Market by ensuring fair opportunities, workers’ rights, and social protection for all. To this end he notably calls on the EU to establish a new task force on housing affordability. When it comes to supporting SMEs, Letta requests simplified procedures, access to information, and streamlined bureaucracy, by for example creating a new European code of business law. He also pinpoints the need to harmonize EU tax frameworks and combat aggressive tax practices to support shared growth and investment. Finally, he emphasizes the need for greater consumer protection.

The fourth section claims the Single Market can go faster and further. Letta considers that the Single Market’s efficiency is hindered by excessive regulation and red tape, particularly impacting SMEs. This raises costs for businesses but also favours non-European competitors. A risk-averse regulatory approach has led to overlapping regulations, creating legal uncertainty and imposing compliance costs. To enhance the Market’s functionality, the report calls on policymakers to streamline the regulatory framework and ensure effective, efficient, and coherent policies. Prioritizing the use of regulations and ensuring consistency across Member States are essential to prevent fragmentation and maintain competitiveness. This approach would be embodied by a new Commission Executive Vice-President, responsible for Single Market and acting as a Chief Enforcement Officer.

The final part of the report deals with the role of the Single Market beyond its borders. In response to the evolving global landscape, the EU must expand its focus beyond internal matters and prioritize the external dimension of the Single Market. Letta finds that to maintain competitiveness, the EU must shape global standards and adapt its trade policy accordingly. This entails balancing integration into the global market with ensuring economic security and resilience. In addition, strategic partnerships and well-founded policies can help navigating geopolitical tensions and addressing enlargement challenges. According to the report, the EU must continue to streamline trade agreement ratification procedures, strengthen trade defence mechanisms, and enhance cooperation with candidate countries to ensure smooth accession processes. Upholding the rule of law to foster common values and build mutual trust is considered essential to maintain the integrity of the Single Market.

Letta’s report ends with a call to action. To prevent the window of opportunity for revitalising the European economy from closing, the report outlines actionable policy recommendations. Letta calls on the European Council to take decisive leadership in advancing necessary reforms for Single Market completion. This entails prioritising the development of a comprehensive Single Market Strategy, outlining clear steps to dismantling existing barriers, fostering consolidation, and elevating competitiveness. He also recommends involving of all EU institutions (including the European Economic and Social Committee and the European Committee of Regions), Member States, and the European public (by establishing a Permanent Citizens’ Conference).

What next?

Letta’s report is comprehensive to say the least. It contains credible and, in some cases, truly innovative ideas. His assessments and recommendations, based on extensive consultations, appear to be pragmatic rather than ideologically driven. Less than a week after it was published, his research has received broad support. European heads of state and government including Emmanuel Macron, Pedro Sánchez and Giorgia Meloni have welcomed his views. Several political groups in the European Parliament such the Socialists and Democrats (centre-left), Renew Europe (liberal) and Greens have also praised his work, while others such as the European Peoples Party (centre-right), European Conservatives and Reformists the European (conservative), The Left (far left) and Identity and Democracy (far-right) have remained silent. Large industry groups such as BusinessEurope, the European Round Table for Industry (ERT), EuroCommerce, Digital Europe or CEFIC, have called the report a “pertinent and timely” “wake-up call”, underscoring “the need for decisive action” and “a reboot of the Single Market”, but some NGOs such as Greenpeace have pushed back on its excessive focus on competitiveness and the potential impact of some measures on “nature and living standards”.

As a moderate personality, with extensive experience at the highest levels of government and in a prominent European think tank, Letta can speak on the same level as European Council members. The main question now is whether the report will come to life or end up on a shelf or in a drawer. To be fully implemented, it would require strong and, in some cases, unanimous backing from Member States and broad support from the new European Parliament. More realistically, the European Council will likely prioritise and eventually pick and choose some of the options he outlined.

The latest Council conclusions provide a first indication of how it could materialise and feed into the EU’s new strategic agenda. EU leaders emphasise the need for “a fully integrated Single Market” supported by investments in key strategic sectors and request “a horizontal strategy for a modernised Single Market by June 2025”. However, the Single Market is only considered as one of the drivers for the “new European competitiveness deal” that EU leaders are calling for, alongside a Capitals Markets Union, industry, research and innovation, energy, circular economy, digital, social policy and trade. This reaction confirms that competitiveness is poised to become the EU’s compass over the next term, but whether political groups in the next Parliament can agree on a common definition and clear objectives remains to be seen. By the time they meet for the first plenary session in July, another report from another former Italian Prime Minister, Mario Draghi, this time focusing explicitly on the EU’s competitiveness, will be out and will no doubt be debated in Brussels and Strasbourg corridors.

Photo by: eunews

EU Elections strategic offer

| By Jessica Brobald | 0 Comments

Moderate Interest and Great Expectations: The View from Paris ahead of the European Elections

| By Jessica Brobald | 0 Comments

By Angeline Charbonnier, Public Affairs Director | Paris, France

In late February, Renaissance, President Macron’s party, announced that MEP Valérie Hayer would head the party’s list in the European elections on June 6-9. This long-awaited announcement brought weeks of political twists and turns to an end, marked by several reshuffles of Prime Minister Gabriel Attal’s cabinet following the controversial appointment (and subsequent dismissal) of Amélie Oudea–Castera as Education Minister.

Likewise, the agricultural crisis in France – and across the EU – has rocked the government and is likely to set the tone and be a major campaign issue for the European elections. While recent announcements by PM Attal and Minister of Agriculture and Food Sovereignty Marc Fesneau, and union support, have managed to quell farmers, several pockets of resistance persist. To wit, President Macron’s inauguration speech at the annual Agriculture Fair, a ritual of French political life, and inaugurating the event per tradition, was met with violent reactions.

The agricultural crisis has seen both Macron’s Renaissance and Marine Le Pen’s nationalist and right-wing populist party National Rally make several appeals to farmers. Renaissance in particular has made several promises including assistance for farmers’ income, defending food sovereignty at the European level, and strengthening controls during trade negotiations. The suspension of the ‘Ecophyto’ plan marks a significant setback in the government’s sustainable agricultural plans. In the meantime left-wing parties, which remain markedly fragmented in France, have failed to make their proposals heard and are currently absent from the debate.

1. Voting Intentions

According to a survey conducted by Odoxa for Public Sénat and the regional daily press, the National Rally currently dominates the French political landscape with 30% of voting intentions. While Renaissance are the runners-up, following a 2-point drop the poll only found that 19% of voters intend to support them in June.

On the left, the list led by the Socialist Party and Place Publique, headed by MEP Raphaël Glucksmann, has consolidated its dominant position with 11% of voting intentions, a 2-point increase since previous polling. Meanwhile, the Ecologists, represented by MEP Marie Toussaint, have experienced a significant increase with 8.5% of voting intentions, but remain 5 points below their 2019 results.

2. The French Electorate’s Expectations

Perhaps more than ever, purchasing power and rising prices will be the two main issues for French voters on June 6-9. In its monthly EuroTrack barometer for “Les Echos” and Radio Classique, OpinionWay-Vae Solis reports that these two issues showed a strong increase – respectively +6 and +5 points – in January and occupy the top two positions, while security (-3) and immigration (-6) remain behind and are on the decline.

Regarding economic actors, while demands vary across sectors, there is a growing sense of frustration against new regulations mandated by the green transition, deemed too drastic and even inconsistent at times. One of proposals part of the Green Deal package aimed to reduce pesticide use by 50% by 2030 – this text was rejected by the European Parliament in November.

3. The Candidates

National Rally (Rassemblement National, RN)

The RN launched its campaign by highlighting immigration as a central theme. Their strategy is divided into three categories: “green files,” “orange files,” and “red files,” with the aim of renegotiating European treaties. The appointment of the former director of Frontex, Fabrice Leggeri, as number three on the RN list illustrates the party’s desire to attract high-ranking public figures.

Renaissance (Rebirth, RE)

After internal hesitations, Valérie Hayer, a sitting MEP from a rural background, was chosen to lead the list. She will have to maintain or improve the score of the presidential majority, currently surpassed by the RN in the polls, amid the ongoing agricultural crisis.

The Ecologists (Europe Ecologistes Les Verts, EELV)

Marie Toussaint, a jurist and key figure in the EELV party, has been designated as the party’s leader. Her task will be to repeat the success of 2019 by proposing an autonomous list and focusing on the fight against climate change.

The Republicans (Les Républicains, LR)

MEP François-Xavier Bellamy will lead LR’s list once again, representing France’s historic conservative faction, with the aim of performing better than in 2019. The party aims to surpass the results of smaller far-right parties such as Eric Zemmour’s Reconquète, whose list is being led by key figure Marion Maréchal.

France Unbowed (La France Insoumise, LFI)

MEP Manon Aubry, co-president of the radical left group in the European Parliament, will lead the LFI list. The party advocates a break with what it calls ‘liberal Europe’ and hopes to mobilise voters around an alternative vision for the bloc.

Place Publique & Socialists (Place Publique, PP – Parti Socialiste, PS)

MEP Raphaël Glucksmann, known for his commitment to human rights, will lead Place Publique’s list, which joint with the Socialists’. His main goal will be to surpass the party’s 2019 results with a social-democratic vision of Europe.

French Communist Party (Parti Communiste Francais, PCF)

Léon Deffontaines has been designated to lead the PCF’s autonomous list. With the aim of exceeding 5% of the votes, he hopes to reconquer the popular electorate with a campaign focused on communist values.

4. Abstention Perspectives: Moderate Interest in European Elections

A survey by Elabe on February 10 reveals moderate interest in the European elections among the French electorate. Indeed, only 47% of those surveyed say they are interested, while 53% are not. Among those interested, 35% are somewhat interested and 12% very interested. Interest in these elections also varies according to demographic criteria: It is more pronounced among those aged 65+ (57%), residents of large urban areas (54%), executives (52%), and men (51%). Conversely, it is less pronounced among those under 65 (43%), residents of rural areas (39%), and workers.

Photo by: Chesnot/Getty Images