The European Parliament has often been criticized as being too distant from the voters. De facto, as survey results show, MEPs feel relatively unbound from their voters and free to act according to their own opinion. As I argue, MEPs role orientations matter for their behavior and thus influence parliamentary decision-making. In my paper, I propose to analyze more closely the attitudes of MEPs toward representation and the impact these attitudes have on their communicative behavior in Committee debates.
The relationship between representatives and their principals has long time been discussed in terms of the “Mandate-Independence-Controversy” (Pitkin 1967). Parliamentarians may act independently and according to their own judgment (Trustee) or follow the instructions of their principals (Delegate). As research has shown, representatives also focus on different interests and diverge in their attitudes toward the parliamentary system.
Based on empirical analysis, I was able to distinguish three distinctive types of representatives in the European Parliament, with different orientations toward their representative mandate. Depending on their role orientations, MEPs are expected to focus on different interests and to follow more or less the instructions of their principals, be it their voters, their national party or their European Political group.
In my study, I combine both interviews with Committee members and a quantitative discourse analysis of selected Committee debates. The instrument permits me to identify role sets of representatives and to analyze their communicative behavior on an individual level. Thus, my analysis enables me to make more general assumptions on the way certain role orientations of Committee members influence the behavior of MEPs toward the interests and demands of their principals.
Based on first results, I will address the question of whether MEPs act independently or follow instructions and what interests do they focus on. Interviews with Committee members are aimed at discovering conflicts, both with their party and/or political group and with their voters or between their principals; the speech act analysis permits me to analyze MEPs behavior on conflicting issues. More generally, the results enable me to discuss the relationship between citizens and MEPs from a different perspective.
