Perceptions of the European Parliament in Hungary

Transcription

1 Directorate-General for Communication Directorate for Relations with Citizens Public Opinion Monitoring Unit For the attention of the European Parliament s DG Communication Public Opinion Monitoring Unit Brussels, April 2012 Perceptions of the European Parliament in I AGGREGATION OF EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT EUROBAROMETER SURVEYS... 2 II REGIONAL ANALYSIS... 3 III BREAKDOWN OF KNOWLEDGE OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT... 8 A Knowledge of the activities and Media recall of the European Parliament ) Knowledge of the European Parliament s activities ) Media recall of the European Parliament... 9 B Knowledge of the functioning and of the way in which the institution is elected ) Knowledge of the functioning of the European Parliament ) Knowledge of the functioning of the European Parliament IV EXPECTATIONS OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT A Priority policies B Priority values C The expected role of the European Parliament METHODOLOGICAL ANNEX: REGIONAL ANALYSIS OF THE EUROBAROMETER RESULTS A Limits of regional analysis based on results of a single survey B A regional analysis is possible by combining the results of several surveys... 17

2 I AGGREGATION OF EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT EUROBAROMETER SURVEYS The Eurobarometer tool is not designed to analyse results on a regional scale. However, combining the data from several EB/EP surveys in which the same questions were asked makes it possible to discern regional results. Combining the results from these Eurobarometer surveys gives us a single, overall result. Changes in public opinion over time cannot be analysed on the basis of this result, but it does allow a regional analysis to be made. The different surveys taken into account for this data aggregation were commissioned by the European Parliament s Directorate-General for Communication. The surveys were carried out by TNS Opinion & Social. This aggregation is based on the following eight surveys: EB/EP 76.3 Fieldwork: 5 November 20 November 2011 Coverage: people interviewed face-to-face (: 1021). Population: Europeans aged 15 years and over EB/EP 75.2 Fieldwork: 13 April 8 May 2011 Coverage: people interviewed face-to-face (: 1022). Population: Europeans aged 15 years and over EB/EP 74.3 Fieldwork: 25 November - 17 December 2010 Coverage: people interviewed face-to-face (: 1014). Population: Europeans aged 15 years and over EB/EP 74.1 Fieldwork: 26 August - 16 September 2010 Coverage: people interviewed face-to-face (: 1022). Population: Europeans aged 15 years and over EB/EP 73.1 Fieldwork: 29 January - 17 February 2010 Coverage: people interviewed face-to-face (: 1017). Population: Europeans aged 15 years and over EB/EP 71.1 Fieldwork: 16 January - 22 February 2009 Coverage: people interviewed face-to-face (: 1023). Population: Europeans aged 15 years and over EB/EP 70.1 Fieldwork: 6 October - 6 November 2008 Coverage: people interviewed face-to-face (: 1002). Population: Europeans aged 15 years and over EB/EP 68.1 Fieldwork: 22 September - 3 November 2007 Coverage: people interviewed face-to-face (: 1000). Population: Europeans aged 15 years and over Comments on changes that have taken place (at national or European level) will identify the survey concerned by referring to the first month of the fieldwork and the year: for example, in the case of survey EB 68 we will talk about the September 2007 survey. 2/17

3 II REGIONAL ANALYSIS The analysis of results of different EB/EP surveys conducted between 2007 and 2011 reveals a number of differences between Hungarian regions. Knowledge of the European Parliament s activities: the aggregated results reveal that the feeling of being well-informed about the European Parliament s activities is slightly stronger in than in the EU as a whole (29% in, compared with 27% in the EU). Some variations exist between Hungarian regions: more than a third of respondents feel wellinformed about the EP s activities in (40%) and in (34%). A quarter or more feel the same in the (28%), Transdanubia (26%) and (25%) regions. This feeling is least widespread in the regions of (24%) and (18%). 3/17

4 Media recall: media recall of information regarding the European Parliament in is slightly above the European average (55% in compared with 52% in the EU as a whole). The results vary between Hungarian regions: in five of them, (63%), (60%), (55%), (53%) and Transdanubia (50%), at least half of the respondents can remember seeing, reading or hearing information recently about the European Parliament. Conversely, in two other regions, a narrow majority of respondents do not remember encountering recently information about the EP: (52%) and South-Transdanubia (54%). Knowledge of how the European Parliament functions: - A wafer-thin majority of respondents in believe that MEPs sit in the EP according to their nationality (45%, compared with a European average of 39%). Conversely, a narrow minority know that MEPs sit according to their political affinities (44%, compared with 39% in the EU as a whole). Some variations exist between Hungarian regions. In three of them, a majority of respondents know that MEPs sit in the European Parliament on the basis of their political affinities: this is the case in (45%), (46%) and to a larger extent in (55%). Conversely, majorities of respondents believe that MEPs sit in the EP according to their nationality in Great and Transdanubia (both 47%), (50%), and (51%). Behind this aggregated result over a four-year period, it should be noted that overall, knowledge of how MEPs sit in the EP has increased since September 2007 (up from 41% to 46% in November 2011). A detailed analysis of the trend line shows that different stages can be identified: after a slight decrease between September 2007 (41%) and January 2009 (39%, -2 points), the proportion of respondents knowing that MEPs sit according to their political affinities rose sharply in January 2010, a few months after the European elections (held in June 2009), to become the majority view (51%, +12 points). In November 2010 (more than a year after the elections), it declined, becoming the minority opinion once more (42%); most recently, in November 2011, it has again become the majority view (46%), after a 4-point increase. - The knowledge of respondents in regarding how MEPs are appointed is slightly above the EU average (59% know that MEPs are directly elected by citizens, compared with 55% in the EU as a whole). In each Hungarian region, a majority of respondents know the correct answer, in proportions which vary from 46% in to 67% in. Overall, knowledge of how MEPs are appointed has increased between September 2007 and November 2011 (up from 53% to 60%). However, it should be noted that it has remained almost stable since January 2009: 61% in January 2009, 62% in January 2010 and 60% in November At the same time, the proportion of incorrect answers has increased: 22% in January 2009, 30% in January 2010 and 34% in November /17

5 Policies to be advocated as a matter of priority: the first priority identified by respondents in is the same as in Europe as a whole: tackling poverty and social exclusion (57% in, compared with 50% in the EU). The hierarchy of the other items in differs from the European average: in second place respondents in choose coordinating economic, budget and tax policies, also in greater numbers than Europeans on average (45%, compared with 30% in the EU, in third place). Respondents in are also concerned with a common energy policy intended to ensure the EU s energy independence, which they place in third position (38% in, 22% in the EU, in eighth place). Overall, respondents in are more likely to mention seven of the twelve policies. Conversely, they are less likely to cite improving consumer and public health protection (28%, in sixth place, 32% in the EU as a whole, in second place); combating terrorism while respecting individual freedoms (20%, in eighth place, 26% in the EU, in equal fourth), a foreign policy that enables the EU to speak with one voice on the international stage (12% in, in eleventh place, 19% in the EU, in tenth) and, most strikingly, an immigration policy implemented in consultation with countries of origin (9% in, in twelfth and last place, 20% in the EU, in ninth), The Hungarian national average varies from the EU average by between 0 and 16 points, while Hungarian regional figures vary by between 6 and 22 points. - Though tackling poverty and social exclusion is the most frequently mentioned policy that should be given priority in every Hungarian region, it is cited much more often by respondents in the region (68%) than by those in (50%). Coordinating economic, budget and tax policies is the second policy in every Hungarian region, and the gap between this and the first policy ( tackling poverty and social exclusion ) varies substantially from one region to another, being the widest in the region where 26 points separate tackling poverty and social exclusion (67%) from coordinating economic, budget and tax policies (41%). It is also quite pronounced in the region, with 21 points between the two top policies (55% and 34% respectively). Conversely, this gap is far lower in and in : 5 and 4 points respectively separate tackling poverty and social exclusion (52% and 50%) from coordinating economic, budget and tax policies (47% and 46%); in, a common energy policy intended to ensure the EU s energy independence is in equal second place (46%). Coordinating economic, budget and tax policies is most cited by respondents in the region (56%, compared with the Hungarian average of 45%). Conversely, they are the least likely to mention three policies: combating climate change ; the assertion of a European social model ; and a research and development (R&D) policy that ensures competitiveness and innovation (same score as in and ). Respondents in are the most likely to mention a common energy policy intended to ensure the EU s energy independence (46%, the only score above the national average of 38%). They are also the most likely to mention four other policies: an agricultural policy that is environmentally friendly and contributes to 5/17

6 the global food balance (37%, compared with the Hungarian average of 34%); the assertion of a European social model (26%, compared with 17%); a foreign policy that enables the EU to speak with one voice on the international stage (15%, compared with 12%) and an immigration policy implemented in consultation with countries of origin (12% compared with 9%). Combating terrorism while respecting individual freedoms is most cited by respondents in (27%, compared with the Hungarian average of 20%). Conversely, they are the least likely to mention six policies: coordinating economic, budget and tax policies ; a common energy policy intended to ensure the EU s energy independence ; an agricultural policy that is environmentally friendly and contributes to the global food balance ; improving consumer and public health protection ; a research and development (R&D) policy that ensures competitiveness and innovation (same score as in and Great ) and a foreign policy that enables the EU to speak with one voice on the international stage (same score as in ). scores above the Hungarian average for nine of these twelve policies. Conversely, has scores below the national average for nine of these twelve policies; this is the case for eight policies in and. Values to be defended as a matter of priority: the protection of human rights is the most important value for respondents in, as in the EU as a whole (64% in, 58% in the EU). In second place, solidarity between EU Member States is also mentioned more often by respondents in than in the EU generally (44% in, 33% in the EU, in equal third place), as is the third priority policy for respondents in, solidarity between the EU and poor countries in the world (32% in, compared with 27% in the EU, in fifth place). Conversely, four policies are mentioned by higher proportions of respondents in Europe on average than in, in particular equality between men and women (28% in, in fourth place, compared with 35% in the EU as a whole, in second); freedom of speech (24% in, in fifth place, compared with 33% in the EU as a whole, in equal third); and the abolition of the death penalty throughout the world (6% in compared with 15% in the EU as a whole, in eighth and last position in and the EU). Differences between and the EU vary by between 1 to 11 points. Though variations between Hungarian regions are more pronounced - with ranges varying from 4 to 15 points -, the first two values to be defended by the European Parliament are the same in overall as in all Hungarian regions: the protection of human rights, followed by solidarity between EU Member States. It should be noted than in almost all Hungarian regions the gap between the first and the second value cited is wide: 20 points or more in every region, with the exception of (11 points). Respondents in are distinguished by a greater attachment to the protection of minorities than respondents in on average: just below a third of them mention this value (32%, in third place, compared with a Hungarian average of 24%, in equal fifth with freedom of speech ). 6/17

7 Role of the European Parliament: an absolute majority of respondents in want the European Parliament to play a larger role than at present (51%, a proportion that is slightly above the European average of 49%). Conversely, 15% would prefer the EP to play a less important role than it currently does, compared with 17% of Europeans on average. In every Hungarian region, majorities of respondents would like a larger role for the EP, with proportions varying from 42% in Transdanubia to 57% in. A trend analysis reveals that after a sharp decrease between September 2007 (55%) and October 2008 (41%), support for this opinion grew steadily, up to 51% in January 2009, 55% in January 2010 and 61% in November 2010, before declining again sharply in the most recent survey (down from 61% to 44% in November 2011). Overall, the proportion of respondents wanting the EP to play a more important role than it currently does has decreased between September 2007 (55%) and November 2011 (44%); meanwhile, the proportion who would prefer a less important role for the EP has increased (up from 10% in September 2007 to 21% in November 2011). CONCLUSION The aggregated results show that respondents in are slightly more likely than the European average to feel well-informed about the EP's activities. Their media recall of information on the EP is also just above that of Europeans on average. Knowledge of the functioning of the European Parliament is also slightly greater in than in the EU as a whole; however, the level of incorrect answers is also above that of Europeans generally. Though the region, which includes Budapest, always exceeds or equals the Hungarian average, this is not the region with the highest level of knowledge of the EP. In our analysis of priority policies the cumulative results show that the first five priorities cited in are more important for respondents in than for Europeans on average: tackling poverty and social exclusion, coordinating economic, budget and tax policies, a common energy policy intended to ensure the EU s energy independence, an agricultural policy that is environmentally friendly and contributes to the global food balance and a security and defence policy that enables the EU to face up to international crisis. In all Hungarian regions, the protection of human rights and solidarity between EU Member States are the first two values to be defended by the EP, and the gap between these two values is often wide. 7/17

8 III BREAKDOWN OF KNOWLEDGE OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT A Knowledge of the activities and Media recall of the European Parliament 1) Knowledge of the European Parliament s activities - The feeling of being well-informed about the European Parliament s activities is slightly above the European average in. A trend analysis reveals that the feeling of being well-informed has improved overall between September 2007 (24%) and November 2011 (31%). However, after a sharp increase in the run-up to the European elections (up from 23% in October 2008 to 35% in January 2010), this feeling has lost ground since January Important variations can be seen between regions in : while less than a fifth of respondents feel well-informed in, four in ten feel the same in. Question: In general, do you consider that you are very well, fairly well, fairly badly or very badly informed about the European Parliament s activities? Trends: Trends: EP Elections June 2009 Aggregated results: regional variations Total 'Well informed' EP Elections June 2009 Total 'Not well informed' OVERALL RESULTS 8/17 Transdanubia REGIONS FROM NGARY

9 2) Media recall of the European Parliament - Aggregated results show that media recall about the EP in is just above the European average. Media recall in improved between September 2007 and November 2011 (up from 41% to 65%), with an especially dramatic jump around the time of the last European elections of June 2009 (up from 44% in January 2009 to 65% in January 2010). Over the same time, the increase was even more pronounced in the EU as a whole (up from 37% in January 2009 to 62% in January 2010). Half of respondents or more can remember recently encountering information about the European Parliament in,,, and Transdanubia. In and respondents remembering such material form a substantial minority. Question: Have you recently read in the press, seen on the Internet or heard on the radio or television something about the European Parliament? Trends: Trends: EP Elections June 2009 EP Elections June 2009 Aggregated results: regional variations Yes No Transdanubia OVERALL RESULTS REGIONS FROM NGARY 9/17

10 B Knowledge of the functioning and of the way in which the institution is elected 1) Knowledge of the functioning of the European Parliament - Though respondents in are more knowledgeable than Europeans on average about how MEPs sit in the Parliament (44% know that MEPs sit according to their political affinities, compared with 39% in the EU as a whole), they are also more likely to believe, incorrectly, that MEPs sit in the EP according to their nationality, (45%, compared with 39% in the EU as a whole). Over the four-year period analysed, there were more correct than incorrect answers on two occasions: in the survey conducted in January 2010, a few months after the last European elections (51% for their political affinities vs. 39% for their nationality ); and in the most recent survey, in November 2011 (46% vs. 41%). In, and, majorities of respondents know that MEPs sit according to their political affinities. In the four other regions, majorities of respondents believe that MEPs sit in the EP according to their nationality. Question: And, in your opinion, do MEPs sit in the European Parliament according to: their nationality; their political affinities? Trends: Trends: Aggregated results: regional variations 10/17

11 2) Knowledge of the functioning of the European Parliament - Respondents in are also slightly better informed than Europeans on average about how MEPs are appointed: (59% know that they are elected directly by the citizens of each Member State, compared with a European average of 55%). Though the proportion of respondents knowing how MEPs are appointed has increased since September 2007, the proportion of those giving the incorrect answer has also gained ground since January 2009: up from 22% to 30% in January 2010, and 34% in November Majorities of respondents know how MEPs are appointed in every region, with proportions of correct answers varying from 46% in to 67% in. Question: For each of the following statements about the European Union, could you tell me whether you think it is true or false: The members of the European Parliament are directly elected by the citizens of each Member State. Trends: Trends: Aggregated results: regional variations True False Don't know Transdanubia OVERALL RESULTS REGIONS FROM NGARY 11/17

12 IV EXPECTATIONS OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT A Priority policies The results for this question only refer to three and a half waves. Question: The European Parliament promotes the development of certain policies at European Union level. In your opinion, which of the following policies should be given priority? Trends & : 12/17

13 Aggregated results: regional variations An analysis of the regional results reveals a number of differences: Question: "The European Parliament promotes the development of certain policies at European Union level. In your opinion, which of the following policies should be given priority?" Transdanubia Tackling poverty and social exclusion 68% 67% 61% 57% 55% 52% 51% 50% 50% Transdanubia Coordinating economic, budget and tax policies 56% 51% 47% 46% 45% 42% 41% 34% 30% Transdanubia A common energy policy intended to ensure the EU s energy independence 46% 38% 38% 37% 35% 33% 32% 31% 22% Transdanubia An agricultural policy that is environmentally friendly and contributes to the global food balance 37% 36% 34% 34% 33% 32% 31% 29% 25% Transdanubia A security and defence policy that enables the EU to face up to international crisis 42% 36% 35% 32% 31% 28% 27% 20% 26% Transdanubia Improving consumer and public health protection 38% 30% 30% 28% 28% 28% 26% 20% 32% Transdanubia Combating climate change 32% 29% 28% 28% 26% 24% 22% 21% 26% Transdanubia Combating terrorism while respecting individual freedoms 27% 22% 22% 21% 20% 19% 15% 15% 26% Transdanubia The assertion of a European social model 26% 18% 17% 17% 14% 13% 13% 12% 13% Transdanubia A research and development (R&D) policy that ensures competitiveness and innovation 21% 17% 17% 15% 13% 11% 11% 11% 14% Transdanubia A foreign policy that enables the EU to speak with one voice on the international stage 15% 14% 14% 12% 12% 11% 9% 9% 19% Transdanubia An immigration policy implemented in consultation with countries of origin 12% 12% 10% 9% 8% 7% 6% 4% 20% 13/17

14 B Priority values - Aggregated results reveal that though the first value to be defended by the European Parliament, the protection of human rights, is the same for respondents in (64%) and for Europeans on average (58%), the order and level of mentions of the other items differ. -In second position, respondents in cite solidarity between EU Member States in higher proportions than respondents in the EU generally (44% in, 33% in the EU, in equal third place); the third priority value in solidarity between the EU and poor countries in the world is also more cited than in the EU generally (32%, compared with 27% in the EU, in fifth place). - A trend analysis reveals that in the most recent survey, the level of citations of the protection of human rights has decreased sharply (down from 72% in November 2010 to 60% in November 2011). Of the top four values, solidarity between the EU and poor countries in the world is the only one that has gained support between November 2010 and November 2011 (up from 28% to 30%). Question: In your opinion, which of the following values should the European Parliament defend as a matter of priority? Trends: Trends: 14/17

15 Aggregated results: regional variations Question: In your opinion, which of the following values should the European Parliament defend as a matter of priority? Transdanubia The protection of human rights 69% 68% 65% 64% 64% 62% 62% 60% 58% Transdanubidanubia West Trans- Solidarity between EU Member States 49% 47% 45% 44% 44% 42% 40% 35% 33% Transdanubia Solidarity between the EU and poor countries in the world 38% 33% 33% 32% 32% 29% 29% 24% 27% Transdanubia Equality between men and women 32% 31% 30% 29% 28% 27% 24% 23% 35% Transdanubia The protection of minorities 32% 31% 24% 24% 23% 22% 20% 17% 22% Transdanubia Freedom of speech* 26% 26% 25% 24% 24% 23% 22% 22% 33% Transdanubia The dialogue between cultures and religions 29% 25% 24% 23% 23% 20% 20% 17% 24% Transdanubia The abolition of the death penalty throughout the world 9% 8% 6% 6% 5% 5% 4% 4% 15% * This item was not asked in September 2007 and October /17

16 C The expected role of the European Parliament Question: Would you personally like to see the European Parliament play a more important or less important role than it currently does? Trends: Trends: Beginning of the crisis [1] Beginning of the crisis [1] [1] Note that Lehman Brothers filing for bankruptcy on 15 September 2008 is generally considered to mark the start of the economic and financial crisis. Aggregated results: regional variations More important Less important The same (SPONTANEOUS) Don't know Transdanubia OVERALL RESULTS REGIONS FROM NGARY 16/17

17 METHODOLOGICAL ANNEX: REGIONAL ANALYSIS OF THE EUROBAROMETER RESULTS A Limits of regional analysis based on results of a single survey Eurobarometer surveys are used to gauge public opinion in the European Union as a whole and in its 27 Member States. In each of the Member States there are also differences between their various regions. Eurobarometer surveys are carried out on national samples of a standard size, which are perfectly adequate for ensuring representativeness on a national scale. Approximately 1000 interviews are conducted in each country, except in Germany (N1500), the United Kingdom (N1300), Luxembourg (N500), Cyprus (N500) and Malta (N500). However, even in the biggest countries, the number of interviews conducted at the level of each regional entity is too small for the results to be reliable at the regional level. A Eurobarometer national sample is constructed to ensure representativeness at the national level, but is insufficient to draw an analysis on a regional scale. B A regional analysis is possible by combining the results of several surveys By combining the results of different surveys in which the same questions are asked it is possible to achieve sample sizes which make a regional level analysis reliable. A certain number of interviewees is needed (generally at least 150) to begin drawing conclusions about regional trends. This objective can be obtained by combining the results of several surveys to provide a sufficient number of interviews on a regional basis. These results would benefit from being confirmed by specific regional studies. Public Opinion Monitoring Unit SuiviOpinionPublique@europarl.europa.eu 17/17