EP seat allocation at a crossroad: how to face new enlargements? Lessons from history, present dynamics and ways ahead

The growing queue of countries seeking European Union membership, beginning with the Western Balkans and recently lengthened to the Eastern Partnership block, threatens to expose once again the structural weakness of the current system of seat allocation for the European Parliament (EP); hardly fit to handle a Union of 36 or more Members (EU36). This work begins from such an urgent realization and explores how the EP can be reformed in order to accommodate enlargement while maintaining its functionality – a challenge further exacerbated by the need to take into account also fair citizen representation, transnational party politics, and of course national demands. Several major obstacles to reform are identified, like for example the lack of political will or path dependency, and duly taken into consideration. The study then turns to history, to all the instances in which EP seat numbers have changed – with a particular focus on the 2004 ‘Big Bang’ enlargement – and traces how precedents were set and how past challenges were navigated. It then develops comparative scenarios for future enlargements, testing three allocation methods (FPS, Sainte-Laguë and power-compromise Cambridge) both under the current status quo (EU27) and in the case a EU36 came into being. This multidimensional approach should offer a diagnosis of the current impasse, but also forward-looking recommendations for a European Parliament that remains at the same time representative and governable, in an “ever enlarging Union”.