Young Politicians: Different Politics?

Abstract

This article aims to look at the role of young political representatives on the European political scene, frequently referring back to the author's personal experience. It also deals with the main priorities of European youth: intergenerational solidarity and the fight against unemployment. It endeavours to examine the differences in the approaches employed by the political actors of the current generation, on the one hand, and those of older generations, on the other. To do this, it looks at examples related to the ideological links and approaches shared by young political actors from various European countries as a result of the more intensified and frequent contact between them. From this analysis we can establish why the European social model needs to be redefined and why an adjustment is imperative in the face of the new demographic reality. It is a reality that many European countries have failed to anticipate. Their ignorance and recourse to credit have called into question their own sustain-ability and the future of the next generation.

Young politicians: the ‘European generation

In Portugal, and indeed throughout Europe, my generation–-those born in the 1980s–-might be the first to take part in the political process without having lived in times of dictatorship or non-democratic political regimes, without having lived through a war between neighbouring states, and without having known long periods of poverty and destruction in Europe. With the exception of those living in a few countries, we are perhaps the first generation to have been born during the reign of peace and democracy.

This is not to say that we do not value democracy as much as those who fought for it, nor do I mean to say that it is necessary to know dictatorship and war in order to respect democracy and peace. But this is the generation that, thanks to the hard work and struggles of our parents and grandparents, and of other generations, is able to take the values of democracy, peace and prosperity for granted. Peace, freedom and prosperity are the clear consequences today of democracy in the whole of Europe.

If we look at my country, Portugal, we find that the younger generation actively participated in the process of restoring democracy during the Carnation Revolution of 1974, because at that time the students, young soldiers and civilians were fundamental to the demise of the dictatorship and especially to the building of democracy. During that time, the youth, who are now 45-55 years old, took on leadership roles on both a national and local level, and many of them remain engaged in the national political scene to this day. They have thus not allowed, albeit unintentionally and with some rare exceptions, the younger generations to break through into the political decision-making centres. However, for some years now, the first generation not to have lived through the revolution process in Portugal has been beginning to take on political roles.

A shift in ideology

A big part of the Portuguese left wing, somewhat opportunistically, still claims to have been ‘traumatised’ by the dictatorship, which serves to justify some of the political positions more appropriate to their ideology. Moreover, these left-wing parties are more dated in their agents or, at least, in their ideas and, above all, in their prejudices. These are the ‘traumas of the revolution’. These traumas eventually crystallised into a set of ideas, concepts and rights, such as labour flexibility, competitiveness and differentiation by merit, which are still provided for in the Portuguese Constitution despite the fact that they no longer make sense given the current reality.

This is where right-wing European conservative parties present themselves as having fewer prejudices and as clinging less to the ideological past, assuming an if not more modern position then one which is certainly closer to the reality and pragmatism that is required to face the problems of our society. Today, the new generations can see that it is imperative that the available resources normally forgotten by left-wing parties are managed carefully. It is increasingly necessary to know who is paying and where these resources have come from.

I therefore feel that the generations of younger politicians, especially those on the centre-right, are more likely to act without prejudice and, in particular, are less likely to cling to ideologies. I am not implying that they do not conform to an ideology, or that they do not believe in the ideological outline of their political currency, but that they seem to be freer and more flexible in their thoughts and in the solutions that they find for the problems of their communities. Democracy and its ways have changed, as have the social demands for which parties present political and economic proposals. Thus, the problem is that after several years and various political regimes based on ideologies, none has evolved, with an exception being made, perhaps, for Tony Blair's third way, which mixed centre-right-oriented economic policy and centre-left-oriented social policy.

With the arrival of younger but more skilled political agents, with less political experience and bearing fewer burdens from the past, and young people who have studied under Erasmus or other similar programmes and so have become familiar with other European countries, the first ‘European’ generation is now starting to take on leadership roles. These young people have travelled more, have seen more examples from other countries, feel more comfortable in learning from others and are, in principle, more prepared to innovate and share their knowledge.

I would like to believe that, unlike in the recent past, we now have young people in the institutions of political power who represent people of their own age, rather than just people from the older generations with the same old-fashioned clichés, who decide on policies for the coming generations based only on their experiences when they were younger, which was ‘some decades ago’.

With these new generations taking leadership, we now have young people representing young people and deciding on appropriate policies for their problems. We can therefore say that young people today are once again taking part in the political process as they did at the beginning of the democratic process in several countries, where they took a decisive and fundamental stand for the consolidation of freedom and democracy throughout Europe. This situation was particularly true of Portugal.

On the other hand, it is symptomatic of the problem that, for many years, it has been easier for a young man or woman to rise up the hierarchy in the private sector than in the public sector or in politics. In several countries in Europe, young people have been easily able to gain management positions in companies or research centres, leading thousands of people and managing millions of euros, while, due to prejudices or other reasons, this has not so frequently been the case with regard to participation in the political process.

This is why I believe that the participation of more young people in political decision-making brings to the democratic process and the management of public resources a more pragmatic approach, less restricted by the barriers or ideological prejudices which have so often prevented more appropriate policies or decisions in the public interest from being chosen.

My personal experience leads me to believe that in matters related to education and intergenerational justice it is more fruitful to have interlocutors of the same generation represented in the other political parties in the Portuguese Parliament. We speak the same language, we know the problems better because we have experienced them more recently and, in addition, we are able to reach an understanding much more easily than older politicians who have eroded their relationships over the years in various political fights or who have forgotten the realities of youth. In fact, I would compare the situation of the younger generation with that of pensioners. These two groups, with their very specific problems, do not usually have an organised lobby defending their interests and are increasingly justifying the existence of adequate representatives in political power, and not just through informal pressure groups.

Today, youth policies are not limited to social or controversial issues such as abortion, gay marriage or the free use of drugs. Rather they are increasingly related to economics, employment, and work and living standards. These are issues that, once again, politics deals with in a crystallised manner, for example, via the ‘classic’ social partners, a concept that dates back to the ‘class conflict’. This no longer makes sense, since there is no longer a conflict between worker and employer, or at least not the one that is referred to here. Instead, the conflict is between those within the employment system, with their due rights and social protection, and those on the outside. This may be why some youth movements, such as the European Youth Forum, tend to claim a set of specific rights for young people (a position that I personally disagree with, as what should be asked for is equal rights and opportunities for all generations).

Young people take European ‘good practice’ into national politics

Even when it comes to discussing European policies, I see greater consensus on the virtues of the European project among younger politicians than in other generations. By virtue of expanded contact through various political, social and cultural platforms, and once again due to programmes such as Erasmus, the younger generations from all countries are more frequently in contact with each other than is the case with their parents and grandparents. I would even dare to say that they are more alike in their customs and habits, priorities and ideas. I think that this is also why there is a more European generation of young political leaders today than there has been before, although there continue to be high rates of youth abstention in the European elections.

It is important to mention here the new reality brought about by the Schengen area. For a young person today, the concept of a border is very difficult to understand. Incidentally, ‘free mobility’ is one of the main topics focused on by young people, and this is closely related to the concepts of ‘democratic citizenship’ and ‘youth development’.

This greater role that young people are playing in the various decision-making processes on a European level, through different European youth organisations and social movements; as volunteers, sports competitors, Scouts and Guides, researchers, and artists, among many other roles; and through processes such as the ‘structured dialogue’, has been leading to a greater level of youth political participation in matters from which they have been excluded for too many years.

We can now begin to say that young Europeans are participating in the decisions about their future.

This example of youth participation has been the premise for several European programmes that have aimed to create initial opportunities for young people to take part more frequently in political and civic activities at the European level, or through a European initiative, than in their own countries. As a positive externality, these new generations of youth leaders eventually get involved a posteriori in actions of civic participation or political action in their own countries, having matured and become prepared politically. This importation of good practices and concepts seized on at the European level by these new generations changes their political motivations in their countries of origin.

We must not forget that values such as commitment to discussion, negotiation, the importance of respect for other people's opinions, greater openness to difference, the primacy of transparency and the sound management of resources are in-built priorities in every European action and programme and that this, fortunately, is reflected in the generations that come into contact with them.

We can also say that, at the European level, a new generation of young political actors is being fostered who share a set of positive values that will help to create a generation of more accountable, prepared and mature politicians who will, I believe, shape a more prepared and qualified generation for the defence of the public cause and their populations.

How my path influences my performance

The route that any political actor takes in their life and their political career helps to shape their characteristics as a person, leader and politician in a decisive way. I speak of human values and characteristics, such as proximity to the population in terms of courage and sensitivity, as well as in terms of experience or knowledge of the most varied dossiers and affairs. Regardless of these factors, I would add that the capability to analyse and make political decisions is either innate, that is, natural, or comes with experience, empirically.

If, some decades ago, the experience of youth shaped the more persistent politicians through ideological training, today's young actors make up for this with better technical preparation and more diverse qualifications. No longer are political actors only drawn from the professions of law, medicine and pedagogy; today they come from other, far more varied backgrounds.

I would say that today the political class is less limited to the hereditary elite from a certain social stratum, but is more accepting of social mobility and reaffirms the greater diversity and eclecticism of political agents. This is obviously due to the contribution of younger generations, who have had access to knowledge and training that, although often out of their parents’ reach, they made a point of letting their children experience.

In my case, the fact that early on in my student career I became president of my faculty's student association allowed me to quickly develop leadership and political decision-making skills that are very useful to me today. The fact that I represented my colleagues and have fought for the solutions to their problems, presenting real resolutions to the governing bodies of the university and to the government itself, forced me to put in continuous effort and commitment, which has made me a more prepared political agent. The same opportunity also put me in contact with teachers and coordinators from various institutions who a normal student would not have had access to. During that period, I learned that in spite of being young, if we have our convictions, if we work as a team, if we know how to create the solutions to our problems and present them clearly, we can win the respect of older decision-makers and seemingly distant professors.

I would also add two further relevant factors that I recognise as having been decisive in shaping my attitude as a politician: that I never ceased to be a committed and successful student whilst having these political roles, and that I have always sought not to mix my own political and partisan beliefs with the interests of the students that I represented and the institution that I managed. It was my independence from my party and the then government that gained me my credibility and political respect.

On the other hand, these early roles allowed me to acquire a more in-depth understanding of the whole higher education sector, both from the students’ point of view and also from the points of view of the teachers and staff–-something which is quite useful for me today as a member of the parliamentary committee for education.

These skills, acquired through informal education processes and life experience, later become crucial to the performance of jobs and responsibilities, both politically and in other roles we may play in society, namely in companies and other institutions.

The diversity of areas in which today's young people get involved from a tender age also allows us to have a more enriched experience of the world. If I had not, early on in college, engaged in activities related to the functions and performance of NATO, I would not have had the opportunity to fully understand the post-war reality in the former Yugoslavia or to know young people from countries such as Serbia, Croatia, Slovenia, the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, and Bosnia and Herzegovina, or from the Republic of Srpska. Such experience allows me to look at the process of accession of these countries to the EU today and have a much more acute sensitivity to their idiosyncrasies without prejudice due to a lack of information. Through political youth organisations, such as the Youth of the European People's Party (YEPP), the Young European Socialists and the European Young Liberals, today the participation of thousands of young Europeans in the decision-making processes regarding European policies in their countries of origin is more informed and qualified.

I myself feel much more prepared today to make decisions within the scope of the European Affairs Committee of the Portuguese Parliament after having held positions for four years on the board of YEPP.

I also know now that I can count on first-hand information from the countless other young politicians that I have met over the years, from various parties, both within my partisan family, and from others with whom we, as young politicians, meet more often to discuss options and policies for youth. Over the course of these moments, relationships of trust, respect and collaboration have been built, and I think these can be very useful in deepening and solidifying the European project in which we all believe.

The opportunity to lead a youth party connected to one of the main political parties in Portugal, not independently, but autonomously, forced me to deal with a diversity of issues that I never expected to come into contact with. Whereas in past years youth policies in Portugal and Europe were marked by discounts on products, access to youth hostels and to tapering on housing prices, and campaigns against AIDS, drugs and alcohol, today the priorities are clearly different. It is unanimous that today the flag of youth and its main concern is youth unemployment, which affects young people's emancipation and quality of life. The quality of and access to education is perhaps the most long-standing youth priority of recent decades. However, we are increasingly faced with an urgent need to ensure greater justice between the generations, an issue which has been called into question by the lack of sustainability of the foundations of the state, particularly with regards to public debt and the Welfare State.

On this path, and having faced all these changes myself, I have been obliged to come up with low-cost solutions and innovative ideas to solve these types of problems. Spearheading a youth political structure whose ‘parent’ party has been both in power and in opposition has forced me to do things which I had never thought possible at my age, such as discussing the state budget with the prime minister, debating changes to the pension system and even taking on a role reserved for the opposition by criticising the minister for education. Among several examples of innovative proposals submitted and approved by the parliament that I can proudly recall, I would highlight the act that called for conditions to be applied to low-cost urban rehabilitation, and the Draft Resolution on the outlawing of smartshops. However, I would also mention the Proposal to establish a new culture of entrepreneurship in Portugal; the changes made to the status of student workers; the introduction of a public debate on the criminalisation of political acts of mismanagement; and even the various changes that, at our suggestion, the government has made to the school-based social action system for higher education students.

Some of these measures earned the applause and unanimous approval of all the opposition parties in Portugal and I believe that this was only possible because within these parties we have found interlocutors of our own age, of our generation, who, like us, know the problems that our friends face in their everyday lives. It has been necessary to learn from our mistakes in order to continuously improve, but this has undoubtedly made us, and me, more able. With these small decisions, we feel that we are helping to improve the quality of life of the population and, in particular, of young people. In moments such as these, any young person in political office takes on their role as youth lobbyist free of guilt, on behalf of a whole generation that sees itself as represented, not by a party, but by an equal.

Along this journey, I have learned to deal with various sectors, and particularly the youth one which, in addition to youth political associations, also encompasses student associations. I have also had contact with trade unions, teaching associations, and corporate and trade confederations, all in a process of ‘learning by doing’ that cannot be learned at university but must be learned at the school of life. The keys to success in these meetings are good sense, an analytical ability, and, most importantly, good preparation. Our interlocutors are increasingly less tolerant of incompetence or corruption.

The process of political participation and decision-making is becoming more demanding and less tolerated. By this I mean that political actions are increasingly being scrutinised by the people, who have grown disgruntled and are, therefore, more demanding and less tolerant. With the evolution of media and the increasingly more democratised access to information through social networks, the proximity of citizens to decisions and decision-makers is increasing, which requires of those decision-makers double the amount of good sense and in-depth competence.

The closeness that we feel towards problems and populations allows us to make more informed decisions with a much better knowledge of reality. At a time when politics has a much degraded image, particularly in the countries of Southern Europe, political actors are increasingly required to display their authenticity. After ‘plastic’ politicians, dependent on teleprompters and decisions taken on the basis of opinion polls or the media's affections, citizens today are demanding authentic, incorruptible and brave politicians, who have the courage to tell the truth and don't get lost in rhetoric or pure political intrigue.

Conclusion: rescue the future of new generations

The new generation is tired of the increasing debt in their countries, the lack of social justice, the heavier tax burden and the unchanging decision-makers. This generation has more shared ideas and values, with more similar ideas, and does not have the ideological preconceptions or need to cling to the past of their parties and of their countries. I believe that they are becoming more and more suspicious of parties and the current models of representativeness. Note should be taken of what has happened in the Arab Spring; in Greece, Spain and Portugal; and even in the US. All these manifestations of discontent were distanced from political parties, overtaking them in terms of presence, but, because of this, also creating less of an impact.

In recent years, the majority of European countries have suffered from the ageing of their population and the lack of economic growth, while simultaneously the Welfare State has continued to grow. In my opinion, this is one of the main reasons for the crisis that we are living in in Europe. To cope with the difficulties of financing that come with having an increasingly reversed age pyramid, with fewer births and people living longer, these countries have decided to increase their debt, rather than adapting to the circumstances or increasing their birth rate, in order to fund their Welfare States, an attitude no political leader has dared to question.

In other words, while previously the Welfare State had been financed by means of taxation, as the demographic has changed countries have begun to finance their actions through debt contraction and the taxes of generations which have yet to be born or to start work. This recourse to public debt and public-private partnerships, among other funding models, transfers responsibility to the new generations, which basically means that grandchildren are taxed in order to pay for their grandparents’ pensions. This situation should unite the new generations, not to fight against another, but to try to get the older generations to relinquish some of their acquired rights in order to allow the younger generations to have anything at all. This is what is at stake and must be achieved to avoid a future clash between generations. I would remind you that solidarity is always a two-way street, from younger to older and vice versa.

The current generation of those under 25 is probably the first generation to reverse the trend that has brought us to this point and to live in worse conditions than those of the previous generation, in spite of being the most qualified generation ever.

However, we must not forget that the European social model is a fortunate characteristic of this Europe of ours. Thus, we cannot ignore the fact that, without ensuring its sustainability, the future of this model may be in question. It is for this reason that one of the challenges facing these new generations is the adaptation of this social model to the available resources and the existing reality. The goal can only be to ensure that those who really need it the most have the opportunities they need to access the support that they require. Without ensuring the sustainability of the European social model we are putting the purpose for which it is intended at risk.

Today even the new generation's grandparents can be seen taking part in demonstrations, not due to concern about their pensions, but on behalf of their children and grandchildren. Society has already understood the situation, and politicians from both sides of the political spectrum have realised this. Now, what remains to be done is to take action.