Pragmatic Networkers from a Small Member State: On How to Be an Effective Finnish Member of the European Parliament

The European Parliament (EP) is a unique supranational legislature that brings together representatives from 27 member states, sitting together in eight transnational, ideologically divergent political groups, speaking 24 official languages, and building majorities in flexible coalitions. How to be an effective Member of the European Parliament (MEP) in such a challenging context – especially when coming from a small member state? Previous research on national delegations in the EP have mainly focused on pathways to the candidacy (Arter 2015; ​​Beauvallet and Michon 2016); with only few studies on the power, impact and political culture of specific national delegations, such as French or Polish MEPs (Kauppi 2018; Zuba 2023), and with a dominant research interest on the tensions and competition between national parties and the EP’s political groups (Dafydd 2019; Elomäki et al 2023; Faas 2003; Raunio 2000; Roslund 2021). This leaves aside important questions about the importance of national political culture and political party culture, as well as the difference that the size of the national delegation makes for possible avenues of political influence in the European Parliament. The aim of this paper is to provide answers to these questions in general and from the Finnish perspective in particular. With 15 MEPs, Finland is among the smaller member states. Due to a similar structure of the Finnish and the EU-wide party system, Finnish MEPs are represented in six different groups, forming very small delegations of 1-4 members. The 2024 elections saw a significant change in their composition, with many incumbent MEPs retiring. In many cases, their replacements have considerable political experience, having served as members of the Finnish parliament or even as national ministers, but are new to the specific environment of the EP. The paper is based on research interviews with Finnish MEPs in the 2024-2029 legislature, as well as ex-MEPs from the 2019-2024 legislature. Qualitative content analysis of the interview data focuses on the perceptions of the Finnish MEPs of what makes their work in the EP effective and what hampers it. We analyse how Finnish MEPs construct their own role as democratic representatives, how they assess the differences between the national and the European Parliament – for example, in the (lack of a) government-opposition dynamic or in political practices like the cordon sanitaire against the far right –, and how they see relations with their own political groups in terms of ideological alignment and its significance for their legislative work. Finally, we focus on small member state dynamics in general and “Finnishness” in particular: What power asymmetries do Finnish MEPs perceive among national delegations, what networks do they value, and how do aspects of the Finnish political culture – such as the strong consensualism or the reputation for pragmatism and trustworthiness – affect their work in the EP?