The European Parliament offers a unique opportunity to examine how the European Union’s future is debated — by the supranational representatives of its citizens. This chapter therefore analyses a selection of plenary debates related to the future of the European integration, focusing on the reform proposals put forward by European political groups concerning key democratic issues, such as differentiated integration and dominance within the Union. This reveals nuanced differences between and within the groups that go beyond the simplistic pro- versus anti-European integration divide.
How do legislators deal with having preferences that go against those of the principals that they represent in parliament? This article analyses the debate in the aftermath of the Brexit referendum in the House of Commons to explore the relationship between divergent preferences and legislative speeches. It finds that legislators who defy the will of their country or constituency are rather communicative, and their speeches reveal higher levels of negativity. In contrast, those defying their party refrain from speaking in parliament, but if they speak, they use a significantly less negative language.