Preparations are already well under for May’s landmark European Parliament elections. The ballot is assuming much higher importance than in previous years and it may, in effect, be a referendum on the six-decade integration project, with French President Emmanuel Macron depicting the contest as a choice for or against Europe. This is because, presuming the UK leaves the EU as planned in March, the elections will be the first since any member state left the bloc, and Euroskeptic parties across the continent are hoping for big gains. If this happens, there is a real possibility that anti-EU parties could win enough seats in the Parliament to significantly influence and potentially stymie legislation, rather than just rant about it, as is often now the case. The election also matters for the rest of the world, as the EU remains an economic superpower, with its collective gross domestic product paralleling that of the US and remaining larger than that of China. It is also the world’s biggest exporter, with the scores of nations for which Europe is the leading trade partner ranging from China in Asia to Brazil in South America. Yet it is the Euroskeptic element of this year’s election that will capture the most attention. In part, this is because of the role of former Donald Trump aide Steve Bannon, who actively campaigned in the Italian election several months ago. Bannon believes that the “populist, nationalist revolt” in the EU is some 18 months to two years ahead of the US, and he has claimed credit for bringing together the coalition government of the far-right League and populist Five Star Movement in Rome. Bannon has set up a Brussels-based organization called The Movement to provide polling support to populist parties standing in May’s elections. At the same time, Europe’s center-ground parties have been busy laying out an agenda for the EU after Brexit in a bid to highlight the bloc’s resilience. Here they are trying to capitalize on the fact that Eurobarometer surveys have this year found that more people than ever consider their country’s membership of the EU to be a good thing (62 percent) — the highest figure in a quarter of a decade — and 68 percent of people believe that their nation has benefited from EU membership. Nevertheless, at this early stage of the campaign, the wind appears to be in the sails of anti-EU parties. They are seeking to build on their success in the 2014 elections, which saw major gains for anti-integration parties that spanned the ideological spectrum from the extreme right to far left. While the rise of these Euroskeptic parties will complicate proposals for “ever closer union,” the latest polls indicate that the balance of power in the Parliament is most likely to remain with a pro-integration majority, possibly a grand coalition of the center-left and center-right. Andrew Hammond While the rise of these Euroskeptic parties will complicate proposals for “ever closer union,” the latest polls indicate that the balance of power in the Parliament is most likely to remain with a pro-integration majority, possibly a grand coalition of the center-left and center-right. While this will be reassuring to many in the continent and beyond, it cannot be taken for granted given the disenchantment of millions of people against the status quo in Brussels. The increased popularity of Euroskeptic parties reflects a wide range of factors, not just popular discontent with growing European integration. Broader issues include deep disquiet with long-established national political parties and systems (reflected in falling party membership and low trust in politics and politicians), concerns over immigration, and discontent over the post-2008 economic downturn and subsequent austerity measures. In this troubling context, voter discontent is not just manifested in the rise of Euroskeptic parties. In addition, there is growing voter apathy, fueled by the fact that the Parliament is generally not trusted by many in Europe, for whom Brussels seems very remote to their day-to-day lives. Voter turnout at European Parliament elections has declined, slipping from 62 percent in 1979 to a record low of 42 percent in 2014. In a number of countries, however, turnout only just got into the double digits last time around. This apathy comes despite the steadily growing powers enjoyed by the Parliament. Originally created in the 1950s, it assumed enhanced political legitimacy in 1979, when it became a directly elected chamber. Since then, the Parliament has assumed veto power over annual EU budgets of approximately 140 billion euros ($160 billion) and secured powers to amend or block a wide range of draft laws that are devised by the European Commission. The new members of the Parliament will also have significant opportunity to influence the choice of the next European Commission president, widely viewed as the key office holder in Brussels. This is because key groups in the Parliament forged an agreement before the 2014 election — for the first time ever — that the choice of candidate for president to succeed Jose Manuel Barroso should be nominated by the voter bloc that secures the most seats. While national governments have ultimate power over the appointment, the Parliament’s voice was louder than ever on that important decision to select Jean-Claude Juncker, who has held the post for the last half-decade. Taken overall, the 2019 elections may be the most important ever for the European Parliament. With Euroskeptics seeking to make striking gains, the result will probably hinge on turnout and whether voters from the moderate middle ground come out in large enough numbers to ensure that the balance of power in the chamber continues to be held by a pro-integration majority. Andrew Hammond is an Associate at LSE IDEAS at the London School of Economics. Disclaimer: Views expressed by writers in this section are their own and do not necessarily reflect Arab News" point-of-view