EU citizenship consultation 2015
Common values, rights and
democratic participation
Justice and
Consumers
2
3
Contents
Executive Summary5
1. Profile of respondents 13
2. EU citizens and their right to free movement within the EU21
3. EU citizenship: Citizens as political actors and democracy
43
4. Citizens’ views on the promotion of EU common values
59
Věra Jourová
Member of the European Commission
Commissioner for Justice, Consumers and Gender Equality
The voice of
European citizens is heard
What it means to be a European citizen is best reflected in the rights that we gain through EU
citizenship. Without replacing national citizenship, this status gives us additional rights, which most
Europeans use on a daily basis. Furthermore, our Union citizenship is about democracy and our
common values. In challenging times, it is even more important for citizens to have their voice heard
on citizenship rights.
In 2015, we invited citizens all over Europe to tell us about their experiences and views on their Union
citizenship rights. We asked them to share their opinion on our common values, rights and democratic
participation, as well as to tell us how things can be improved. Over two thousand citizens and
organisations replied from all European countries, most of which were young people.
I am delighted to present the key findings of this consultation. This important input will feed into the
Union Citizenship Report 2016.
4
5
Executive Summary
At the end of 2015, the Commission invited citizens all over Europe to share their experiences on EU
citizenship rights including democratic participation and EU common values and to express their
expectations for the future.
EU citizenship gives every national of an EU country specific rights under EU law, including:
•• The right to move and reside freely within the EU, subject to conditions;
•• The right not to be discriminated against on the grounds of their nationality;
•• The right to vote and stand as a candidate in municipal and European Parliament elections
wherever they live in the EU;
•• The right to be assisted by another EU country’s embassy or consulate outside the EU, if their own
country is not represented, under the same conditions as the citizens of that country;
•• The right to petition the European Parliament and complain to the European Ombudsman; and
contact the EU Institutions;
•• The right to organise or support, together with other EU citizens, a citizens’ initiative to call for new
EU legislation.
This report summarises what people and organisations across the EU told the European Commission
in the public consultation on EU citizenship, which was held from 14 September to 7 December 2015.
Its main objective is to give feedback to citizens and organisations as to the overall results of the
public consultation1.
In addition to the public consultation, the European Commission launched in autumn 2015 two
Eurobarometer surveys to investigate the views of EU citizens on a range of questions relating to EU
citizenship rights in general and to electoral rights more specifically. The Commission also organised and
took part in conferences, workshops and meetings on EU citizenship rights. The key findings and trends
identified in these exercises will inform the Commission’s policy work on EU citizenship rights.
The main facts and figures about the public consultation are as follows.
From a methodological point of view, it is important to note that the sample of respondents to this consultation is
not statistically representative of the EU population.
2
Flash EB 430
3
Flash EB 431
1
6
7
Profile of respondents
The public consultation received a total of 2170 responses and consisted of two aspects. Firstly, an
online survey (to which 2163 responses were received) and secondly, a dedicated email account
which received seven submissions in the form of position papers. Of the 2163 responses to the online
survey 2107 (97%) were from individual citizens and 56 (3%) were from organisations.
Italians, Germans, Greeks and British made up the largest number of responses to the consultation.
Map 1: Distribution of respondents by nationality
Key
> 10%
6% to < 10%
Respondents reflected a broad mix of EU nationalities, age and gender. Young people were particularly
active in responding to the public consultation. The majority of those completing the survey (56%)
were under the age of 40. 31% of the respondents were aged 18-30 (by far the biggest group
of respondents), followed by those aged 31-40 (25%). The balance between female and male
respondents was respectively 47% and 53%.
In terms of nationality, all EU countries were represented in the survey. Most active were the Italians
(14%), closely followed by British, German and Greek nationals (all 11%). When looking at responses
by country of residence, respondents residing in Belgium and Italy were the most active. When
compared with the size of each country’s population, nationals from Malta, Greece and Luxembourg
were the biggest groups (see maps 1 to 3).
2% to < 6%
1% to < 2%
< 1%
8
9
European citizens moving
within the EU
European citizens and
participation in EU democratic life
Nearly all of the respondents (98%) had made use of their right to move freely in the EU at least
once in their lifetime. More than four in five respondents who had travelled to another EU country
did so more than once per year. For the vast majority of respondents the main reason for travelling
to another EU country was for holiday (94%), work-related reasons (66%) and visiting family or
friends (58%).
EU citizens who are living in another EU country have the choice between voting and standing as
candidates in the European Parliament elections in the country where they live or in their country
of origin. Most of the respondents (82%) indicated that they had voted in their country of origin
while only one out of four had made use of the possibility to vote in the country in which they were
living (22%).
More than half of the respondents were living or had lived in an EU country other than their own for at
least three months (60%). Almost four out of 10 respondents (39%) were living in another EU country
at the time of the consultation. The majority of those living or having lived in another EU country
had done so for reasons of work (66%) or education and volunteering (64%). Fewer respondents had
done so for family reasons, i.e. to join or accompany their partner/spouse, children, parents or other
family members (25%). Most young people (18-30) indicated that they lived abroad for educational
reasons (58%).
EU citizens who are living in another EU country have the right to vote or stand as candidates
in the local elections in the country where they live. Slightly less than a third of respondents
indicated that they had voted or stood as candidates for municipal elections while living in another
EU country (30%).
Slightly more than one third of those who lived or had lived in another EU country had experienced
some difficulty after having moved (36%). These difficulties were mostly related to lengthy or unclear
administrative procedures (69%) and/or to the lack of sufficient information on or awareness of their
rights as EU citizens (51%).
The overwhelming majority (82%) of respondents indicated that they would like to have online
information on practical issues in the country in which they live (e.g. how to register as a resident,
register on the electoral roll, set up a business, have qualifications recognised, retire etc.). Almost
three out of four respondents (73%) said that e-services on administrative formalities (e.g. filling
out administrative forms online) would be most useful when planning a move to another EU country.
Respondents expressed positive views about free movement. A large majority were of the opinion that
free movement within the EU promotes cultural diversity (81%) and fosters mutual understanding
(77%). They also believed that moving to another EU country helps to create an EU identity (70%) and
brings economic growth (61%). Only 16% expressed the view that free movement creates problems,
with those expressing this view tending to refer especially to practical reasons.
One in five respondents (21%) stated that they had difficulties exercising their right to vote in European
and/or local elections while living in another EU country. Around half of them indicated that these
difficulties related to the administrative burden of registering on the electoral roll (51%) or to insufficient
or unclear information on how to vote (47%).
When asked how citizens’ participation in European elections could be improved, more than four out of
five of the respondents (81%), in particular young people (84%) said the relevance of EU policies for
citizens’ daily lives should be better explained. Almost two out of three (65%) said more information on
the programmes and objectives of candidates and parties in the European Parliament would be useful to
increase participation. Almost one out of three respondents (32%) thought that voting should be made
more accessible in practice to all, including people with disabilities and older people.
Regarding specific practices which could make it easier for EU citizens living in another EU country to
vote in European or local elections there, a majority said e-voting (68%); automatic registration on the
electoral roll when citizens register as residents (63%); and individual letters explaining how to register
and vote (51%) would be good ways to increase citizens’ participation. E-voting was also considered to
be a good way to make it easier for EU citizens living in another EU country to vote in elections in their
country of origin by a vast majority of respondents (81%) whereas 48% of respondents thought that
postal voting would make it easier. Still, respondents were, at the same time, concerned that e-voting
could lead to potential fraud (68%) or had concerns in relation to secrecy of the vote (54%).
10
11
EU citizens have the right to stand as candidates in local elections in the country in which they have
moved to, but certain posts in the executive body of a municipality can be allocated only to the country’s
own nationals in some EU countries. A large majority of respondents (83%) expressed the view that nonnational EU citizens living in their country should be able to become members of the executive body of
a municipality (other than mayor).
European citizens and EU
common values
European citizens and access to
news and political information
The EU is founded on common values such as freedom, democracy, the rule of law and fundamental
rights, including non-discrimination, inclusion, tolerance and respect for diversity. Close to 90% of
respondents thought that more should be done to promote and raise awareness of EU common
values. The great majority of respondents suggested that this should be done through school
education, for example on EU citizenship and the values attached to it, including anti-discrimination
and tolerance (91%), mobility of young people, with Erasmus+ scholarships for instance (72%) and
cultural activities (60%).
EU citizens use a variety of sources for obtaining news and political information on EU democracy and
elections. More than seven out of 10 respondents (72%) said they use internet platforms as a source
of information. Newspapers (63%) and TV (62%) were the second and third most popular sources of
information on EU matters.
Almost eight out of 10 respondents (78%) believed that local and regional authorities should play a
more important role in promoting EU common values.
Besides news, political broadcasting media and internet platforms in their country of residence
(which 95% of respondents consulted), two out of three respondents (65%) indicated that they also
consulted media and internet platforms of other EU countries, including their country or origin.
The majority of the respondents (53%) were only partially satisfied with the information they received.
They expressed the view, for instance, that cross-border coverage should be wider. More than eight
out of 10 respondents (83%) would be interested in accessing more news programmes and political
broadcasting across borders on issues related to European democracy and elections. Nine out of 10
respondents (91%) believed that access to such information across borders would allow EU citizens
to form clearer opinions on issues relevant to democracy in Europe.
Almost nine out of 10 respondents (88%) indicated that the EU should give a stronger voice to
citizens, especially young people, in democratic decision-making through online consultations and
dialogue mechanisms.
12
13
CHAPTER 1
Profile of respondents
1.1 Who took part?
A total of 2170 citizens and organisations from all 28 EU countries took part in the 2015 public
consultation on EU citizenship. 2163 of the responses were received via the online survey and
seven in the form of written position papers which further elaborated on the issues raised.
2107 respondents completed the survey online as individuals (97%) while almost 3% responded on
behalf of an organisation or association (56).
The seven position papers were all received from organisations.
Total number of respondents in survey and consultation
2170
Number of surveys completed online
2163
Number of individual consultation responses (survey)
2107
Number of organisational consultation responses (survey)
56
Number of written position papers submitted by organisations
7
Number of comments and additional points submitted to open questions
Most common nationality of respondents
Most common country of residence of respondents
Country with highest proportion of respondents based on relative population
Approx. 7400
Italian
Belgium
Malta
14
15
Young people were particularly active in the consultation. Almost a third (29%) of respondents was
aged 18-30. Those aged 31-40 was the next biggest age group (one out of four (25%)), while older
age groups were generally less represented.
1.2 Nationality of respondents
Fig. 1: What is your age group?
People from all 28 EU countries responded to the consultation. In absolute terms, Italians, Germans,
Greeks and British made up the largest number of responses. When compared with the size of each
country’s population, Maltese, Greeks and Luxembourgish were more eager to participate (see Map 2).
3%
2%
Map 2: Distribution of respondents as a proportion of national population
17%
Under 18
29%
18-30
31-40
14%
20%
41-50
25%
7 to < 10 per 100,000
5 to < 7 per 100,000
61-70
3 to < 5 per 100,000
71+
Fig. 2: Are you male or female?
53%
> 10 per 100,000
51-60
Men and women were almost equally represented.
47%
Key
Male
Female
< 3 per 100,000
16
17
A larger proportion of citizens living in Belgium and Italy replied in comparison to those living in other
EU countries.
Map 3: Distribution of responses by country of residence
Key
> 8%
1.3 Corporate respondents
Whilst the vast majority of survey respondents were citizens, 3% (56) replied on behalf of civil
society organisations, academic or research institutes, businesses or other institutional bodies, such
as embassies, European affairs organisations or think tanks.
4% to < 8%
The 56 responses completed online by organisations are categorised below.
2% to < 4%
Fig.3: In what capacity are you completing the questionnaire? (Organisational respondents only)
1% to < 2%
< 1%
15
Civil Society
35
2
4
Academic/Research
Businesses
Others
In addition to the 56 organisations that completed the survey, seven organisations submitted position
papers to be considered as part of the consultation. Six of these organisations were civil society
organisations and one a regional association.
18
19
1.4 Mobility of respondents
The large majority of the respondents (98%) had exercised their right to free movement within the EU.
Almost four out of 10 respondents (39%) were living in a country different to their country of origin
at the time of the consultation. Respondents from Slovenia had not exercised their right to free
movement at the time of the consultation and all responded from their country of origin. Italian and
Greek respondents most often responded from their country of origin (above 90%) while respondents
from Luxembourg, Belgium and Cyprus were most often living in another EU country at the time of the
consultation (above 75%).
Fig. 4: Distribution of responses from each country by nationality and country of residence of respondents
Austria
Belgium
40%
60%
17%
83%
Bulgaria
78%
12%
Croatia
75%
25%
Cyprus
25%
75%
Czech Republic
77%
Denmark
37%
63%
73%
Estonia
39%
71%
Germany
29%
Greece
92%
Hungary
31%
58%
42%
Italy
93%
Latvia
29%
40%
60%
12%
88%
Malta
73%
27%
38%
62%
Poland
85%
Portugal
15%
79%
Romania
21%
90%
Slovakia
10%
77%
Slovenia
23%
100%
58%
52%
64
47%
42%
69
United Kingdom
7%
71%
Lithuania
Sweden
8%
69%
Ireland
Spain
10%
61%
France
Netherlands
27%
90%
Finland
Luxembourg
23%
53%
48%
Nationality
Country of residence
20
21
CHAPTER 2
EU citizens and their
right to free movement
within the EU
2.1 Experiences of travelling
within the EU
The vast majority of respondents (98%) had travelled to another EU country at least once in their
lifetime. More than four out of five people who had travelled within the EU did so more than once per
year. Almost half of them (47%) travelled to another EU country between one and five times a year.
Fig. 5: How often do you travel to other EU countries? (All respondents)
19%
less than
47%
1-5 times per year
once per
year
14%
more than
10 times
per year
17%
6-10 times
per year
4%
regularly
22
23
The age group with the most frequent travellers is 51-60. More than one in five respondents in this
group had travelled 10 or more times a year. There are no significant differences in travel patterns
between men and women. Differences between nationalities are also limited.
For the vast majority of respondents (94%), the main reason for travelling to another EU country was for
a holiday. The majority also travelled for work related reasons (66%) and to visit family or friends (58%).
Respondents living abroad at the time of the consultation travelled more frequently than those who
do not. Two out of 10 respondents (21%) travelled more than 10 times per year and one out of 20
(6%) commutes to another EU country.
2.2 Problems encountered by
certain groups of EU citizens
when travelling within the EU
Fig. 6: How often do you travel to other EU countries? (Respondents living in another EU country only)
6% 6%
Less than once per year
21%
1 - 5 times per year
42%
6 - 10 times per year
More than 10 times per year
Regularly (commuter)
25%
By contrast, fewer than one in 10 respondents (8%) living in their home country travelled more than
10 times per year and just one in 50 (2%) travelled regularly to other EU countries (commuters).
Fig. 7: How often do you travel to other EU countries? (Respondents living their home EU country)
2%
For most respondents, travelling within the EU was without problems. Some respondents did
however experience or report problems met by certain groups of EU citizens when travelling within the
EU. Just over a quarter felt that they, or other EU citizens they knew, had been discriminated against
based on personal characteristics (28%).
Fig 8: If you or other EU citizens you know have experienced problems when travelling to another EU
country, which of the following personal characteristics was it based on?
Racial or ethnic origin?
79%
Religion or belief?
23%
Gender?
20%
Disability?
8%
27%
12%
Less than once per year
1 - 5 times per year
6 - 10 times per year
More than 10 times per year
Regularly (commuter)
51%
16%
Age?
Sexual orientation?
15%
0%
24
25
2.3 Citizens’ views on what
could make transport and
travelling easier for people
with reduced mobility or people
with disabilities
2.4 Experience of living in
another EU country
Six out of 10 respondents lived or had lived for at least three months in a country of the EU other
than their own (60%).
Fig. 10: Respondents living or having lived in another EU country for at least three months (by
nationality)
100%
86% 84%
83%
73% 73% 73% 72% 71%
69% 69%
It is often more difficult for people with reduced mobility or people with disabilities to travel. Three
quarters of respondents (74%) thought that accessible transport infrastructure such as airports,
ports, train stations or bus terminals and vehicles would make transport and travelling in the EU
easier for people with reduced mobility or disabilities. Just over half of respondents (51%) said
that more information on the accessibility or limitations of transport infrastructure or vehicles, e.g. on
the respective websites would make it easier for these more vulnerable EU citizens.
65% 64% 63%
62% 61%
59% 58%
52% 51% 50% 50%
49% 48%
46% 46%
42%
30%
Fig. 9: Do you agree or disagree with the following ways of making transport and travelling easier for
citizens with reduced mobility and/or disabilities?
Accessible websites
Better information on passenger rights
Better information on ticketing
Assistance during booking process
26%
24%
Strongly agree
23%
41%
36%
27%
17%
42%
38%
45%
45%
Neither agree nor disagree
35%
29%
32%
Strongly disagree
Malta
Poland
Italy
Estonia
Sweden
Greece
Portugal
Croatia
Belgium
Austria
Germany
Finland
France
Hungary
Netherlands
Bulgaria
Romania
Spain
Latvia
Slovakia
United Kingdom
41%
Slovenia
Assistance during travel
32%
24%
Lithuania
45%
Denmark
Recognition of disability status abroad
18%
31%
Luxembourg
51%
Ireland
Information on the accessibility of transport
17%
10%
Czech Republic
74%
Cyprus
Accessible transport infrastructure
26
27
People of different ages had different experiences of living abroad. More than seven out of 10
respondents over the age of 71 (72%) had lived in another EU country. The same goes with seven
out of 10 respondents (70%) aged 18–30. Six out of 10 respondents (61%) in their thirties had also
lived in another EU country.
Reasons for living in another EU country vary by age group. Most of respondents aged 18-30 lived or
had lived abroad for education, while respondents aged between 31 and 50 were more likely to have
moved to another EU country to work.
Fig. 13: Purpose for living in another EU country for more than three months by age group
Fig. 11: Respondents living or having lived in another EU country by age group
4%
71+
72%
71+
18%
44%
61-70
51%
7%
61-70
51-60
11%
32%
47%
41-50
14%
50%
51-60
15%
32%
31-40
61%
22%
18-30
Under 18
68%
41-50
26%
36%
29%
31%
31-40
Most respondents who lived or had lived in another EU county had done so for work related reasons
(66%). A similar number of respondents had moved to another EU country in order to study or
volunteer (64%). One out of four lived/had lived abroad for family reasons (25%).
41%
45%
22%
18-30
58%
35%
Fig. 12: If you have lived in another EU for more than three months, what was the purpose?
3%
Work
66%
Under 18
8%
0%
Education and volunteering
64%
Family
Family reasons
25%
Education
Work
28
29
2.4.1 Information consulted before deciding to move to another EU
country
Almost all respondents (96%) had looked for information on administrative requirements and
procedures before deciding whether to move to another EU country. Where respondents had looked
for such information, most had looked for information on residence documents, including on how to
register in the municipality (69%). Half had collected information on requirements regarding studying
abroad (50%). Respondents had also looked up information on employment and working conditions
(45%), social security and welfare (41%) and the recognition of diplomas (39%).
Fig.14: What kind of information did you seek to obtain before deciding whether to move to another
EU country?
2.4.2 Sources of information consulted
Respondents stated that the main source of information consulted prior to moving to another EU country
were websites of public authorities of that country. These included websites of authorities at local,
regional and national level. Approximately three out of four respondents (73%) searching for information
available online had used websites of authorities in the EU country to which they were planning to move.
Fig. 15: What sources of information did you consult prior to moving to another EU country?
Web portals, information and assistance
73%
Personal contacts (e.g. family, friends)
Administrative requirements and procedures
96%
Rights to vote and stand as a candidate
19%
Family related matters
16%
Requirements/procedures for acquiring nationality
64%
Web portals of EU institutions
35%
Unofficial/commercial/private websites
34%
Advisors at universities/schools
31%
12%
Expatriate organisations or communities
Accommodation and housing
Other
1%
28%
Social media (e.g. LinkedIn, Facebook)
15%
Books
Chambers of commerce
Respondents also said they had been looking for information on, for example, how to access healthcare
or a family doctor and on how to register a car.
25%
Other
14%
4%
9%
30
31
2.4.3 Use of EU websites
Many respondents also used EU websites or websites funded by the EU as a source of information
before deciding to move.
Fig. 16: Please indicate which, if any, of the following EU websites/services (or supported by the EU)
you have used?
EUROPA/European Commission website
63%
Your Europe portal
31%
EURES
26%
EU representation in your country
19%
European e-Justice Portal
Other
I do not find them user friendly. There is a mass of information
but it is not written in clear English and tends to be very legalistic.
Far more simple and brief information is required for the casual
enquirer.” (British Respondent)
National websites provided certain “general” information but I
never found answers to questions I was looking for. There is a
bubble that exists between the practice in each Member State
and the information that is available to the public. In the end I
managed, but it took me some time.” (Czech Respondent)
11%
SOLVIT
Enterprise Europe Network
Where respondents looked up information before deciding to move to another EU country, more than
three-quarters (77%) were generally satisfied with the sources of information they had used. The
reasons respondents reported for not being satisfied tended to be related to the general character of
the information provided or to the lack of user friendly information.
27%
Europe Direct
ENIC-NARIC portal
2.4.4 How satisfied were citizens with the sources of
information used?
10%
6%
4%
13%
2.5 Difficulties experienced
when living in another
EU country
Two in three respondents (64%) who lived or had lived in another EU country said they did not
experience difficulties in their day-to-day life with regard to the exercise of their rights as EU
citizens after having moved to another EU country.
Those respondents who said they had experienced difficulties reported primarily problems related to
lengthy or unclear administrative procedures (69%), followed by a lack of sufficient information on
their rights as non-nationals or a lack of awareness thereof (51%). Four out of 10 respondents (41%)
said they had experienced difficulties in getting access to private services (e.g., banking or utilities).
32
33
Fig. 17: After having moved to another EU country, did you encounter any difficulties in your day to
day life with regard to the exercise of your rights as an EU citizen?
Lengthy or unclear administrative procedures
69%
Lack of sufficient information on/awareness of rights
51%
Difficulties in getting access to private services
41%
Difficulties in the communication between public authorities
One in five (22%) said they had experienced discrimination because of their nationality. They had
encountered problems across a range of services, in particular when requiring assistance from the
public employment services (29%) or access to healthcare system (27%).
Fig. 18: If you have ever been discriminated against by the administration, public authorities or public
service providers in another EU country because of your nationality, in what areas did you encounter
problems?
38%
Difficulties with the healthcare system
36%
Difficulties in exercising your electoral rights
29%
Difficulties in having qualifications recognised
21%
Difficulties with the education system
Non-recognition of disability-related entitlements
Out of the respondents who lived or had lived in another EU country, the vast majority (78%) said they
had not been discriminated against by the administration, public authorities or public service
providers in that country because of their nationality.
11%
3%
Assistance by public employment services
29%
Access to the healthcare system
27%
Acceptance of civil status documents
26%
Access to social security/recognition of acquired rights
24%
Access to social and tax advantages
24%
Tax rules and procedures
We moved from Belgium to the Netherlands. For each application
(requesting an ID, registering my bicycle, registering to vote,
registering my car, insurance, bank etc.) I needed to request a
proof of residency from the municipality. Each time this costs EUR
12.50 as the proof is only valid for three months… it becomes an
expensive joke. Problems with ID: My home country wants an ID
picture with a white background, while my country of residence
wants one with a grey background. Whenever they differ, my ID is
not valid.” (Belgian Respondent)
22%
Recognition of academic or professional qualifications
20%
Access to education or professional training
Access to the education system
Other
12%
7%
25%
34
35
Initially, awareness that Malta had joined EU was low so at times
I experienced problems in having my documents accepted.”
(Maltese Respondent)
Almost nine out of ten respondents (87%) reported that they had never faced problems when
returning to their country of origin because they had resided in another EU country. Of those (13%)
who had encountered difficulties, most were related to practical difficulties such as the need to
re-register for health insurance or social security or the lack of recognition of any qualifications they
had obtained whilst abroad.
2.6 Views on making it easier
to live in another EU country
Respondents had strong views on how moving and settling down in another EU country could be
made easier.
When asked what would help them to prepare if they were planning to move, more than eight out
of 10 respondents (82%) said that information on practical issues in the country in which they were
planning to move would help. This would comprise for example, information on how to register as a
resident, register in electoral rolls, set up a business, take up a job, have qualifications recognised,
enrol children at school, register a car, retire etc.
Fig. 19: If you were planning to move to another EU country, what measures would help you to prepare?
82%
Online
information
on practical
issues
73%
E-services on
administrative
formalities
56%
5%
Other
Cooperation
between public
authorities
Policies don’t make things easier. Changing procedures and
cutting red tape does.” (Dutch Respondent)
Other suggestions made by respondents included having uniform levels of fees especially university
fees for all EU citizens; an integrated taxation system; a more integrated banking sector, etc.
Almost three out of four respondents (73%) would welcome the availability of e-services enabling
them to fulfil administrative formalities in the country of destination online, such as the possibility to
fill in administrative forms online.
When asked what would help them settle down if they were living in another EU country, almost nine
out of 10 respondents (87%) indicated that settling down in another EU country would be facilitated
if authorities provided information and assistance responding to the individual needs and questions of
newcomers at their request through one-stop-shop websites would be the most helpful.
The majority of respondents (56%) thought that it would be helpful if the authorities of their country
of origin could directly cooperate with the authorities of the EU country in which they were planning
to move, to ease administrative formalities in the country when planning to settle down.
Just under half of the respondents (49%) said policies to promote dialogue between cultures, mutual
understanding and inclusion (including in schools) would be helpful when settling down.
Almost half of the respondents (47%) would like to receive effective support and assistance in the
enforcement of their rights through specialised bodies.
36
37
Fig. 20: If you were living in another EU country, which measures would most help you to settle down?
Information and assistance through
one-stop-shop web portals
87%
Policies to promote intercultural dialogue, mutual
understanding, inclusion
49%
Effective support in the enforcement of rights through
specialised bodies
47%
Policies to support employment and entrepreneurship
43%
Policies to facilitate and promote political and civic
participation
37%
Active diversity management policies in
private companies
Policies related to disability status entitlements
Other
16%
10%
4%
2.7 Views on ways to foster
learning mobility for students,
trainees, volunteers and
teachers
2.7.1 Opportunities created for young people to study, train and
volunteer in another EU country
More and more young people in Europe are studying, training or volunteering in another EU
country, either during their studies or at the beginning of their professional career. The vast majority
of respondents held positive views on these cross-border experiences.
Fig. 21: Do you think that cross-border training, education and volunteering experience (multiple
replies possible):
Increases potential and career prospects
85%
Fosters mutual understanding and respect for diversity
84%
Helps in fostering an EU identity
Does not provide any particular benefit
Other
72%
3%
3%
It is a real opportunity to improve the feeling that we all belong to
one continent, one destiny, and to foster the EU identity.”
(French Respondent)
38
39
2.7.4 Erasmus+
2.7.2 Tools to facilitate mobility for young people beyond
employment
Respondents were asked what would be useful support for young people looking for opportunities
beyond employment. More than eight out of 10 of the respondents to this question (85%) said that a
platform hosting cross-border placements or offers for apprenticeships and trainees would be helpful
to young people.
Fig. 22: What do you think would be helpful, in your view, to support young people looking for
opportunities beyond employment? (multiple replies possible)
Erasmus+ is the EU programme for education, training, youth and sport for 2014-2020. Erasmus+
finances activities and projects which enable people (students, trainees, youngsters, teachers, trainers,
lecturers and youth workers) to move around the EU to study, train, gain work experience or volunteer.
One in eight respondents stated that they had applied for an Erasmus+ grant (13%). Seven in 10
Erasmus+ applicants were aged 40 or younger (70%).
Only 12% indicated that they did not know about the programme.
Fig 24: Age breakdown of those who had applied for a grant from the Erasmus+ programme
Platform for cross-border placements
85%
Mentor advice
1%
0%
1%
63%
Under 18
7%
Peer advice
Other
18 - 30
61%
31 - 40
21%
4%
46%
41 - 50
51 - 60
61 - 70
2.7.3 Citizens’ views on how to foster learning mobility
24%
Almost eight out of 10 respondents (77%) thought that inviting teachers from other EU countries
to teach at institutions (such as schools) would be the most beneficial for learners (77%). Almost
seven out of 10 respondents (69%) said it would be beneficial if teachers were helped to share good
practices with their peers across borders. Two-thirds of respondents (67%) said that it would also
benefit learners if they could receive lectures from invited staff of companies from other countries.
71+
Several respondents took the opportunity to comment that they had benefited from, and enjoyed,
the Erasmus programme. One respondent also took the opportunity to call on the EU to do more to
support the participation of people with disabilities in these programmes.
Fig.23: Which activities do you think would benefit learners?
Invite teachers from other EU countries
Teachers sharing good practices across borders
Invite lecturers from companies in other EU countries
77%
69%
67%
Just look at how many Erasmus marriages there are!”
(British Respondent)
40
41
2.8 Overall views on free
movement of citizens within
the EU
The overwhelming majority of respondents had a positive view on free movement of citizens within
the EU. In particular:
•• More than four in five respondents (81%) were of the opinion that moving to another EU country
brings with it cultural diversity;
•• Almost eight out of 10 respondents (77%) thought that moving to another EU country fosters
mutual understanding;
•• More than seven out of 10 respondents (75%) held that moving to another EU country brings
specific knowledge and skills;
•• Seven out of 10 respondents (70%) believed that moving to another EU country helps create an
EU identity;
•• More than six out of 10 respondents (61%) were of the opinion that moving to another EU country
creates economic growth;
•• Less than two out of 10 respondents (16%) expressed the view that moving to another EU country
created problems.
Fig. 25: Do you think that moving to another EU country brings any of the following?
81%
Has a positive
effect on
cultural
diversity
77%
fosters mutual
understanding
70%
helps create
an EU
identity
16%
brings
problems
76%
brings specific
knowledge
and skills
61%
creates
economic
growth
There was no notable variation of the views expressed across EU countries.
There is no better way of fostering mutual understanding than
the creation and maintenance of relationships, whether at
professional or personal level.” (British Respondent)
Free movement is the greatest of all EU achievements.
Implementation still needs work in several countries, but it is
worth it!” (Austrian Respondent)
This (free movement) is the heart and soul of Europe. Without it
there is no EU.” (Bulgarian Respondent)
Those respondents who expressed the view that moving to another EU country created problems
tended to refer especially to practical reasons.
It is an enormously stressful thing to do. Housing, work, tax,
entitlements... all very different and very hard to learn.”
(British Respondent)
42
43
CHAPTER 3
EU citizenship: Citizens
as political actors
and democracy
3.1 Citizens’ experience in
participation in the democratic
life of the EU
EU citizenship gives every citizen the right to vote for and stand as a candidate in European elections.
When they live in another EU country, they can choose to vote in their country of origin or in the
country in which they live.
More than eight out of 10 respondents (82%) indicated that they had voted in the European elections
in their country of origin. Just over two in 10 respondents (22%) indicated that they had made use
of the possibility to vote in the country in which they were living.
44
45
In the two tables below, “Mobile citizens” refers to citizens who were living in another EU country at
the time of the consultation. “Non-mobile citizens” were those living in their country of origin at the
time of the consultation. It should also be noted that respondents who were living in their country of
origin at the time of the consultation could also reply that they had voted in another EU country if
they had done so in the past when living abroad (and vice versa).
Fig. 26: Have you exercised your right to vote in European Parliament elections in your own country?
Mobile citizens
72%
Non-mobile citizens
All
12%
82%
Yes
Non-mobile citizens
All
54%
94%
22%
Allow citizens to maintain their right to vote after they have
moved abroad. It is completely undemocratic to have EU-citizens
with no right to vote at any national or regional level. And yet, this
is my case.” (British Respondent)
No
46%
6%
Several respondents complained about the fact that EU citizens who lived in another EU country had,
in some cases, no right to vote at any national or regional elections, which was felt as undemocratic.
18%
Fig. 27: Have you exercised your right to vote in European Parliament elections in another EU country?
Mobile citizens
EU citizenship does not grant the right to EU citizens to vote or stand as a candidate in national or
regional elections in the EU country in which they live. Just over one out of 10 respondents (12%)
who had lived or were currently living in another EU country had voted or stood as candidate during
national or regional elections in the EU country in which they were living4.
Just over half of respondents (53%) who had lived or were currently living in another EU country had
voted or stood as a candidate at national or regional elections in their own country.
28%
88%
Only three out of 10 respondents (30%) who had lived or were currently living in another EU country
had voted or stood as a candidate in local elections in the EU country in which they were living.
Only one in five respondents (21%) said they had experienced difficulties exercising their right to
vote in European and/or local elections whilst living in another EU country.
Some nationalities (such as Maltese and Spanish) seemed to experience more problems in exercising
their voting rights while living in another EU country whilst others such as Croatians, Cypriots and
Poles reported fewer problems.
The respondents living in Cyprus, Lithuania and Luxembourg seemed to experience more practical
difficulties in exercising their voting rights while respondents living in Greece, Hungary and Romania
reported the fewest problems.
78%
Yes
No
EU citizens who are living in another EU country also have the right to vote and stand as candidates
in local elections in the country in which they live, under the same conditions as the nationals of that
country.
Voting in national elections as a non-national EU citizen residing in a country other than that of his or her nationality is only possible for Irish citizens living
in the UK and vice versa. Some EU countries, such as Sweden and Denmark, have decided to grant EU citizens the right to vote in the regional elections
organised on their territory. For more details see the Annex in the Commission Implementing decision of 24 July 2012 (2012/412/EU) http://eur-lex.europa.
eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex:32012D0412
4
46
47
Fig.28 Have you experienced difficulties in voting in European and/or local elections whilst living in
another EU country? (responses by nationality and by country of residence)
Austria
14%
10%
Belgium
20%
17%
21%
Bulgaria
Fig. 29: If you encountered difficulties in voting, what were the reasons for the difficulties encountered?
28%
Administrative burden for registering on the electoral roll
Croatia
8%
13%
Estonia
22%
27%
21%
2%
18%
22%
France
Germany
Ireland
Italy
Latvia
8%
6%
25%
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Slovenia
Sweden
United Kingdom
50%
33%
36%
44%
Other problems mentioned by the respondents were:
•• Lack of information in the language other than the local one;
•• Lack of awareness in local administrations;
14%
10%
9%
17%
15%
5%
22%
•• Problems related to the postal system, with postal ballots either being lost or never arriving;
•• Losing the right to vote in the country of origin after spending more than a certain amount of time
abroad while not being able to vote in the country in which they live.
30%
25%
18%
32%
24%
22%
24%
24%
29%
•• Lack of possibility to vote electronically or online;
21%
Spain
6%
Yes - Nationality
33%
Slovakia
39%
Other
Yes - Country of Residence
15%
Malta
Netherlands
Difficulties in accessing the polling station due to
disability or reduced mobility
14%
18%
24%
15%
18%
Luxembourg
43%
Lack of information about my rights
18%
Lithuania
47%
Insufficient or unclear information received regarding
registration on the electoral roll
33%
Finland
Hungary
Insufficient/unclear information on how to vote
27%
33%
Czech Republic
Greece
51%
67%
Cyprus
Denmark
Respondents experienced a range of problems when exercising their right to vote in European or
local elections whilst living in another EU country. Just over half of the respondents (51%) found
the procedures for registration on the electoral roll burdensome. Almost one out of two respondents
(47%) said that information on how to vote was either insufficient or unclear.
43%
48
49
The UK system debars non-residents from voting in regional
or local elections. We are able to vote in UK national elections
but the postal voting system is not fit for purpose, leading to
votes lost or not arriving on time, consistently over 12 years.
After 15 years away our vote is taken away completely leaving
us unrepresented both in the UK and in France. The EU should
address such anomalies”. (British Respondent)
3.2 Citizens’ views on how to
increase citizens’ participation
in the democratic life of the EU
3.2.1 How to increase participation in European elections
Fig.30: Which of the following could in your opinion increase citizens’ participation in European
elections?
The relevance of EU policies for citizens'
daily lives being better explained
80%
More information on programmes and objectives of the
lead candidates for the function of President of the EC
65%
More information on the EP elections
57%
More information on the programmes and
objectives of candidates and parties in the EP
44%
Voting being made more accessible to all,
including people with disabilities and older people
Other
32%
8%
Other suggestions made by respondents to increase citizens’ participation in European elections
mentioned by respondents included:
•• Promoting an EU-debate;
Eight out of 10 respondents (80%) thought that better explanations of how EU policies are relevant
to their daily lives would encourage voting in EU elections. This was the view in particular of first
time voters and young adults (18-30). More than eight out of 10 respondents (84%) of this age group
thought that this would help increase citizens’ participation.
•• Increasing the national media broadcasting of European elections in EU countries, particularly of
the debate between the lead candidates for the function of President of the European Commission;
Almost two thirds of the respondents (65%) called for more information on the policies and objectives
of candidates and parties in the European Parliament. A majority of respondents (57%) would like
to receive more information on the European Parliament elections as such. More than four out of 10
respondents (44%) would like to obtain more information on programmes and objectives of the lead
candidates for the function of President of the European Commission. Slightly less than a third of
respondents (31%) thought that voting should be made more accessible in practice to all, including to
people with disabilities and older people.
•• A mix of local candidates and a proportional representation system;
•• Organising European elections at EU-level and on the same day;
•• A ‘pan-European’ list to give the European elections their own identity;
National general media should broadcast the EU Commission
presidential debate.” (French Respondent)
EU elections should be organised at EU level, not by Member
States. People don’t see the issues as there’s no EU-debate and
the framework is confusing. It’s hard to understand why Brits vote
on Thursdays while the French only on Sundays. If given more
time and access, people would be likely to vote or feel the urge to
vote.” (French Respondent)
50
51
3.2.2 How to make it easier to vote in European or local elections
in another EU country
EU citizens residing in another EU country should be able to easily exercise their right to vote in
European and local elections there.
Regarding specific practices which could make it easier for EU citizens living in another EU country to
vote in European or local elections there, a large majority (68%) believed that a good way to do so
would be the possibility to vote using electronic or online tools. Automatic registration on the electoral
roll when citizens register as residents (63%) and individual letters explaining how to register and
vote (51%) would also be good ways to increase participation for EU citizens residing in another
EU country.
Fig. 31: Which of the following practices could make it easier for EU citizens residing in another EU
country to exercise their right to vote in European/local elections there?
Possibility to cast vote using electronic/online tools
68%
Registration on the electoral roll
automatically based on residency
63%
Receiving individual letters
explaining how to register and vote
51%
Possibility to cast vote by post
39%
Improve accessibility of polling stations,
in particular for people with reduced mobility
Other
27%
3%
Please, make e-voting happen. We are in 2015, the “security”
argument against e-voting is clearly not holding up. If e-banking
can be secure enough, voting can be as well.”
(Slovenian Respondent)
I did not know I could vote. Do you ever show it/promote it in the
media?” (Danish Respondent)
I was not aware that I could already vote. I would have wanted
to. I found out too late. I think this should be promoted
much more so that all citizens of the EU are made aware”.
(Romanian Respondent)
3.2.3 How to make it easier for citizens living in another EU country
to vote in European or local elections in their country of origin
Some EU countries offer the possibility for their own nationals who reside abroad to cast their vote
in national elections from the country in which they live. Possibilities include voting by post, using
electronic or online tools and voting in consulates etc. The vast majority of respondents (94%) agreed
that such possibilities simplify life for EU citizens living in another EU country.
E-voting was also considered to be a good way to make it easier for EU citizens living in another
EU country to vote in elections in their country of origin by a vast majority of respondents (81%)
whereas 48% of respondents thought that postal voting would make it easier.
Fig. 32: Which of the following possibilities would make it easier for EU citizens living in another EU
country to vote in elections in their home country?
Possibility to cast their vote using electronic/online tools
81%
Possibility to cast their vote by post
48%
Possibility to cast their vote in consulates
Other
41%
3%
52
53
Voting by post is too slow, voting at a consulate inconvenient (and
for most people impossible). Electronic voting is definitely the way
to go in this case with other options available for those unused to
computer technology.” (UK Respondent)
There was some difference across nationalities. In particular, e-voting was thought to be helpful in
particular by Croatians, Cypriots and Lithuanians. It was considered less helpful by Austrians, Germans
and Swedes.
Austrians, German and Irish most often thought that postal voting would be helpful. It was felt to be
least helpful by Lithuanian, Bulgarians and Hungarians.
Voting in consulates was seen as a helpful idea most often by Cypriots, Finns, Slovenians and Swedes.
It was seen as helpful least often by Croatians and Lithuanians.
When asked if they would have specific concerns about e-voting, almost seven out of 10 (68%) had
concerns about potential fraud. The majority (54%) were concerned about potential impact on the
secrecy of the vote. Nearly half of respondents (44%) would have concerns related to the system not
being accessible to all.
Concerns on electronic voting vary by nationality. Slovenians are the most concerned about potential
fraud (82%), while Estonians the least (33%). Slovenian respondents were also the most worried
about the system not being accessible to all (82%). Finnish respondents were particularly concerned
(62%) about the independence of the vote.
3.2.4 Citizens’ views on extending the electoral rights of EU
citizens in local elections
EU citizens who live in another EU country have the right to stand as candidates in local elections
there under the same conditions as the nationals of that country. However, EU countries have the
right to exclude citizens from other EU countries from a number of posts in the executive bodies of
the municipalities.
More than eight out of 10 respondents (83%) thought that EU citizens living in another EU country
should be able to become members of the executive body of a municipality. A large majority of
respondents in all EU countries except one (Estonia) agreed that this should be the case.
Fig.34: Do you consider that EU citizens living in another EU country should be able to run in local
elections and become members of the executive body of a municipality?
100%
92% 91% 91% 91% 90%
89% 88%
86% 86% 86% 86% 84%
83% 83% 83% 83% 82% 82% 80%
Fig. 33: If you had the opportunity to vote by means of electronic/online tools, would you have specific
concerns about any of the following?
Potential fraud
78% 76% 75%
70% 70% 69%
64%
68%
46%
Secrecy of the vote
54%
System not accessible to all
Estonia
Sweden
Poland
Bulgaria
Belgium
Hungary
Germany
Austria
Slovenia
Finland
Denmark
Slovakia
Luxembourg
Latvia
Ireland
Greece
Romania
Italy
France
Czech Republic
United Kingdom
Malta
Croatia
Spain
Netherlands
5%
Lithuania
Other
25%
Portugal
Independence of the vote
Cyprus
44%
54
55
3.3 Citizens’ experience and
views about access to news
and political information
EU citizens use a variety of sources for accessing news and political information on issues related
to European democracy and elections. Access to such information is essential to allow European
citizens to fully participate in the democratic life of the EU.
Fig. 35: What source of information do you use to keep up to date on news and political broadcasting,
including European elections?
Internet
I did not feel that I had enough political information to make
a decision.” (Hungarian Respondent)
Fig. 36: Are you satisfied with the information you receive?
8%
63%
Television
Radio
Only four out of 10 respondents (40%) said they were satisfied with the information they receive.
Over half of the respondents (53%) said that they were only partially satisfied.
72%
Newspapers
Social Media
The vast majority (95%) of respondents said they used news and political broadcasting media and
internet platforms in the country in which they lived. More than six out of 10 respondents (65%) also
consulted media and internet platforms in other EU countries, including their country of origin if they
were living in another EU country.
62%
52%
No
53%
39%
Yes
Partially (e.g. cross-border coverage could
be wider)
49%
More than seven out of 10 respondents (72%) said they use internet platforms as the primary
source of information on political news and broadcasting. Newspapers (63%) and TV (62%) were
the second and third most popular sources of information on EU matters. Young people preferred, to
a very large extent, to use internet and social media as their primary source of information. Older
respondents (aged over 61) considered the radio and newspapers as the most important source
of information.
Almost a quarter of the respondents complained about the lack of cross-border coverage of news
and political broadcasting. Almost two-thirds of these felt that the coverage of European issues
tended to be one-sided or influenced by the national perspective. Respondents also said that little or
no information was available from a pan-European perspective.
56
57
Cross-border coverage is sometimes very bad. In Germany we
don’t know what’s going on in France or what the Poles think. And
these are both neighbouring countries!” (German Respondent)
Other respondents regretted that access to media platforms of other EU countries was not available
from everywhere due to ‘geo-blocking’. This was particularly stressed by EU nationals who were living
in another EU country and were unable to follow news from their home country.
Information should be more independent and truly cross-border.
Some content is geo-blocked.” (Portugese Respondent)
More than eight out of 10 respondents (83%) would be interested in accessing more news programmes
and political broadcasting across the EU. This should be across national borders and on issues related
to European democracy and elections.
Nine out of 10 respondents (91%) thought that more access to news and political broadcasting
information across borders would allow EU citizens to form clearer opinions on issues relevant to
democracy in Europe.
Respondents suggested that EU programmes, policies and initiatives should be promoted to a
greater extent.
58
59
CHAPTER 4
Citizens’ views on
the promotion of EU
common values
The European Union is founded on common values such as democracy, the rule of law, and
fundamental rights. European common values include non-discrimination, inclusion, tolerance and
respect for diversity.
4.1 More should be done to promote EU common values
Nine out of 10 respondents (90%) thought that more should be done to promote and raise awareness
of these common values. This can be achieved in a number of ways, respondents believed, such as
through school education (91%), through the mobility of young people (72%), cultural activities (60%)
and through youth organisations and youth work (54%).
Through personal experience and shared experienced events, this
thinking can change. Particularly I see sport and cultural exchange
as a mouthpiece for the common people who want to have little
to do with politics. The European idea is a win for all EU citizens,
but sometimes it seems to feel like the smallest element
in the EU.” (German Respondent)
60
61
Fig. 37: If you think more should be done to promote and raise awareness of these common values
in our societies, how could this be done?
School education
91%
The mobility of young people
72%
Cultural activities
60%
Youth organisations and youth work
54%
University learning and research
54%
Initiatives to generate debate
amongst citizens on these issues
4.2 The role of local and regional authorities More than three out of four respondents (78%) thought that local and regional authorities should play
a more important role in promoting EU common values. Suggestions from the respondents regarding
the tools that could be used to this end included:
•• Cross-cultural events and festivals;
Festivals celebrating cross European achievements - and
encouraging various nationalities to take part in cross cultural
events.” (UK Respondent)
51%
•• Local EU “ambassadors” whose job would be to promote the work of the EU at a local level;
Debates within civil society tackling the processes of
stigmatisation, exclusion and discrimination
48%
Life-long learning
48%
Transnational sport or other events
36%
Citizenship ceremonies for new citizens
Other
People don’t know anything about the values of the EU… All we
hear about the EU is through the media, and it’s more often than
not negative.” (Slovenian Respondent)
•• A better narrative of what the EU has done as an institution and of what would not have been
possible without the work of the EU.
They can promote what the EU is funding in our regions. What
projects wouldn’t have been possible without financial support
from EU.” (French Respondent)
29%
4.3 Give EU citizens a stronger voice
4%
Almost nine out of 10 respondents (88%) thought that the EU should do more to give citizens,
a stronger voice in democratic decision-making through online consultations and dialogue
mechanisms. Many people agreed that such efforts should focus especially on young people. Many
respondents also said that this should not be at the exclusion of older people.
Respondents were keen to play a more active role in the European political life and called for more
interaction with EU, national and local politicians on issues that matter to them.
Roundtables organised to this end, debates, new EU citizens
discussing on EU values with politicians (e.g. at Citizens
Dialogues).” (Czech Respondent)
62
63
More information on the European Union is available on the Internet (http://europa.eu).
Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2016
ISBN 978-92-79-57029-2
doi:10.2838/4648
© European Union, 2016
Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged.
Printed in the EU
Europe Direct is a service to help you find answers
to your questions about the European Union.
Freephone number (*):
00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11
(*) The information given is free, as are most calls (though some operators,
phone boxes or hotels may charge you).
HOW TO OBTAIN EU PUBLICATIONS
Free publications:
• one copy:
via EU Bookshop (http://bookshop.europa.eu);
•
more than one copy or posters/maps:
from the European Union’s representations (http://ec.europa.eu/represent_en.htm);
from the delegations in non-EU countries (http://eeas.europa.eu/delegations/index_en.htm);
by contacting the Europe Direct service (http://europa.eu/europedirect/index_en.htm) or
calling 00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11 (freephone number from anywhere in the EU) (*).
(*) The information given is free, as are most calls (though some operators, phone boxes or hotels may charge you).
Priced publications:
• via EU Bookshop (http://bookshop.europa.eu).
DS-02-16-220-EN-C
#EUCitizenship2016
http://ec.europa.eu/justice/citizen
ISBN 978-92-79-57029-2
doi:10.2838/4648