An MEP's Travails in Europe
Nicholas Newman interviews Peter Skinner MEP

When I first met Peter Skinner, Labour MEP for the South East, I found a great conversationalist, who was very sincere and knowledgeable about his work, yet able to appreciate differing opinions. It was no wonder that people crowded round to hear the discussions led by Mr.Skinner.
This summer, for Peter and the European Parliament, has been even hotter, not unexpected when Tony Blair took over the EU Presidency in July, determined to introduce his ‘Third Way’ modernising policies. With the ‘No’ votes on the Constitution, demands for the end of the CAP, Britain’s rebate up for negotiation and Germany facing early elections, the European Parliament can expect an exciting time.

‘Normally, media interest is poor.’ stated Peter in exasperation, busy representing his constituents’ interests in the European Parliament, but this summer , he has never been so popular with the media; it has been a nice change from being largely ignored. Our public service broadcasters tend to close the eyes to EU matters, especially if they prove complicated, though vitally important to our voters. Normally MEPs find it hard to get adequate coverage ‘on that box in the corner.’ As a rule Peter has to depend on more tried and tested methods, giving interviews, writing newspaper articles and going out to many social engagements in order to reach some of the ‘8.1 million people in 83 constituencies in the South East Region.’

To many it is a great mystery what European Parliamentarians do all day; certainly it is not the picture that our tabloids like to depict of expense account lunches and overseas trips. In fact, for Peter it is a constant grind, being the South East’s only Labour representative, means there is no one to share the work load. He often finds it very difficult to separate personal life from work, ‘I always seem to be on duty,’ he comments.

Unlike national parliaments, the European Parliament cannot initiate legislation; instead it can amend, and block legislation, like it did with the troubled Computer Implemented Inventions Directive recently. However, it can approve or reject the whole Commission en bloc, as was the case last year when it was not happy with some of the candidates for posts in the Commission. In fact Peter argues, ‘individual MEPs, have more influence over the development of legislation than MPs in Westminster who depend on winning the luck of the draw to gain their opportunity to introduce a private members bill.’ This interested me, because I always thought our MPs in the House of Commons were mere lobby fodder, and the strident demands by some MPs, was a realization by them of how ineffectual they were in policy formation, as compared to their colleagues in the European Parliament.

When Peter is not on duty in the European Parliament or in his constituency, he is at work on behalf of Europe. Recently, he was with a team of MEPs in Washington ‘educating’ Congress in the need to work together with the European Parliament on law making, rather than expecting the rest of the world to adjust their laws to suit America’s needs. Peter says ‘many in Congress have found it culturally difficult to accept that there is a world outside the United States.’ Fortunately, some in Congress are beginning to see the light that both America and Europe should work together when framing laws. ‘In fact Parliaments in the rest of the world are using European legislation as a template for their own lawmaking.’

He is especially proud of the work he has done to improve Directives on Health and Safety legislation. He believes it is a basic human right that people should be able to work in a safe and healthy environment. However he does find it hard sometimes to convince his fellow parliamentarians of the need for progress on environmental, economic, financial or even social issues. On his fellow Socialists in the European Parliament he commented that ‘just because a colleague is a member of the same political grouping, it is not always safe to assume your collaborator will be in agreement with everything you say.’ The same goes for reform of the European Union, where French MEPs preferred to maintain, like their President, the status quo, even when this meant keeping 20 million people unemployed in Europe. Despite these differences Britain’s Labour MEPs, are admired for their hard work and commitment by fellow Parliamentarians.

Being an MEP, since 1994, is a great contrast from his early years as a lecturer in European issues and business. He has found his interest in languages a very useful skill, but it has certainly been an advantage that ‘English is now the business language of the EU’ much to the distaste of the French, no doubt.’

For Peter and many of his fellow colleagues in the European Parliament, ‘one of the most tiresome bugbears is the constant travelling between Brussels, Luxembourg and Strasbourg.’ There is little MEPs can do about it, for only through agreement of member states governments can things be changed, and the French have strenuously blocked any such attempts to allow MEPs the freedom to decide where they would like to meet. It seemed to me that the French support the concepts of ‘freedom, liberty and equality’ only when it suits them? For now, as Peter Skinner says ‘this detestable practice, which wastes taxpayer’s money, continues.’