European HomeParliaments, 3rd Round

The results

In the 3rd Round of European HomeParliaments, solidarity in the EU was discussed in 12 EU countries. For the first time, even people who had never met before entered into conversation with each other,, even across countries. 31 politicians from five countries responded to the participants’ concerns.

To the results

On the reactions of the politicians

These were the 2020 HomeParliaments

In the autumn of 2020, around 1200 participants discussed compensation payments in the event of a crisis, social inequality between member states and the fight against climate change. As in the first two rounds of the European HomeParliaments, the participants of the privately organised discussion rounds were impressed by about the constructive exchange of ideas, the mutual understanding for each other and the insights gained from a well-structured discussion about the future of European solidarity.

Several new features were introduced at the same time. For the first time, almost half of the HomeParliaments took place via video conference. A matching process meant that discussion groups were formed between people who had not previously met.

In addition, for the first time, HomeParliaments were held in 12 different countries. In some HomeParliaments, discussions even took place across borders.

In addition to Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, 30 EU politicians from 5 countries and 5 parties commented on the results.

Results of the 3rd round

„Should the EU move towards more mutual solidarity?"

After discussing the various aspects, 97 percent of the HomeParliaments spoke in favour of more mutual solidarity in the EU.

p

1200 participants
1000 results received
166 approvals
4 rejections
1 abstention

„Should wealthy EU Member States provide more economic support to Member States that are particularly hard hit by crises?"

Average: 7,4

0 corresponds to little agreement – 10 corresponds to full agreement

Most HomeParliaments want mutual economic support in the event of a crisis because this strengthens cohesion and mutual trust, which in turn strengthens the community of states’ ability to act in foreign policy.

The main counter-argument was that mutual financial support gives strength to Eurosceptic initiatives in the event of a crisis.

What politicians say

This says ...

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Hildegard Bentele

EPP
Germany

This says ...

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Manfred Weber

EPP
Germany

This says ...

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Othmar Karas

EPP
Austria

This says ...

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Nicola Beer

Renew Europe
Germany

This says ...

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Fabienne Keller

Renew Europe
France

This says ...

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Jan-Christoph Oetjen

Renew Europe
Germany

This says ...

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Martin Schirdewan

GUE / NGL
Germany

This says ...

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Helmut Scholz

GUE / NGL
Germany

This says ...

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Franziska Brantner

Greens / EFA
Germany

This says ...

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Gwendoline Delbos-Corfield

Greens / EFA
France

This says ...

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Jutta Paulus

Greens / EFA
Germany

This says ...

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Hannah Neumann

Greens / EFA
Germany

This says ...

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Sergey Lagodinksy

Greens / EFA
Germany

This says ...

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Gabriele Bischoff

S&D
Germany

„Should the EU invest more in social policy measures to tackle social inequality between the Member States?“

Average: 6,5

0 corresponds to little agreement – 10 corresponds to full agreement

The most frequently cited argument for more social policies was the resulting sense of community and European solidarity.

The main argument against such measures was that such a policy can only fail because of the different social security systems and cultural backgrounds.