European Parliament election results

Yesterday the voting in the European Parliament elections ended and the count generally shows that the centre-right party group has been strengthened, while many far right-wing parties and protest parties made it into the EP, such as the Swedish Pirate Party, which got one seat. Participation was as usual low in most countries. Luxembourg was at the top of the list with 91 % voting while Slovakia came last with a participation of only 19.64 %. The average of some 43 % is the lowest in the history of the European Parliament.
Results country by country may be found at The Guardian's excellent website:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/interactive/2009/jun/08/european-election-results-countries-2009

If one clicks on Norway the map says "Results not yet in", which is interesting as Norway is not a member of the European Union. But for the first time a Norwegian citizen, Eva Joly, was elected to the European Parliament, representing the party Europe Écologie, which won two of the French seats.
The election turned out to be another disaster for Britain's Labour Party - in fact even worse than expected. Labour received only 15.8 % of the votes, which is their worst result since 1910 and means that they loose 6 of their 19 MEPs. The Conservatives came first with 27.5 % and 25 MEPs, UKIP second with 16.6 % and 13 MEPs. Even the racist British National Party got 2 MEPs with 6.3 % of the votes. British results can be found here:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/european-election-results-map-2009

Today Environment Minister Jane Kennedy added to Gordon Brown's agony by resigning, while former Lord Chancellor and Justice Secretary Charles Falconer in an article in The Times calls on the Prime Minister to go:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/guest_contributors/article6451928.ece

Also in Germany the Social Democrats did their worst election in decades, winning only 20.8 % of the votes, which may be an interesting indicator of the outcome of the country's general election in September.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/0,1518,629138,00.html#ref=rss

Gender-neutral Act of Succession approved in Denmark

Final results show that the amendment to the Danish Act of Succession which aimed to introduce gender-neutral succession was passed in yesterday’s referendum. In Denmark it is not possible to make constitutional amendments unless 40 % of the total electorate vote yes in a referendum. Yesterday 58.5 % took part in the referendum, 85.4 % of them voted yes while 14.6 % voted no or cast blank votes, meaning that 45.5 % of the electorate approved of the change while 7.8 % of the total electorate voted against and 5.2 % cast blank votes.

http://www.dr.dk/Nyheder/Temaer/2009/Europa/2009/06/07/204555.htm

http://politiken.dk/politik/article727455.ece

http://politiken.dk/newsinenglish/article727469.ece (in English)

This means that in the future the eldest child will come first in line of succession regardless of whether it is a boy or a girl, while the Act of Succession of 1953 gave royal sons precedence over their sisters. This will however not affect anyone currently in line of succession, as Queen Margrethe has two sons, Crown Prince Frederik had a son before a daughter and Prince Joachim has three sons. Princess Benedikte and Princess Elisabeth will also keep their places at the end of the line of succession.
The debate which suddenly arose in the last two weeks before the referendum has been quite interesting to follow. While a huge majority was in favour of the amendment, many took the opportunity to discuss several other issues which were not up for a vote. Among them was the future of the monarchy itself and republicans must have cherished this opportunity to have a serious debate about this issue which is very rarely discussed in Denmark these days.
In the end most of those who did not vote “yes” did so not because they were opposed to the change itself but because they were opposed to the monarchy, wanted a more far-reaching reform of the Constitution or because they saw no need to change the Act of Succession now when it will not alter the current line of succession.
In 1953 it did alter the line of succession dramatically which caused a lot of hard feelings within the royal family. Therefore it was a good thing to do it now that it could be treated as a question of principles and not as a choice between a prince and a princess.
Had the Act fallen in the referendum it would have reflected badly on Denmark as a country where gender equality is considered important and it would also have been embarrassing for the government, which had been criticised for holding the referendum together with the election to the European Parliament, which normally attracts few voters, rather than with the local elections in the autumn.
Now the government’s plan seems a success: The amendment was carried in the referendum and the referendum may also have attracted more voters to the EU elections than what has previously been the case earlier – 59.5 % took part in the European election against 47.89 % in 2004. The fact that there was a real debate in the last few weeks probably also helped saving the Act of Succession, which might have fallen if fewer had turned out to vote and the yes votes had been less than 40 % of the electorate. So in the end it seems to have been a good day for almost everyone.
Perhaps expect for the royal family? In Berlingske Tidende the historian Jes Fabricius Møller says that the many votes against the amendment must be interpreted as an expression of dissatisfaction with the royal family and that this means harder times ahead for them:

http://www.berlingske.dk/article/20090607/danmark/706070089/

http://www.berlingske.dk/article/20090607/danmark/706070080/

http://politiken.dk/indland/article727597.ece

Exit poll suggests Act of Succession approved

The final exit poll conducted for Politiken and TV 2 as voting stations closed in Denmark at 8 p.m. suggests that the Act of Succession was passed. According to this poll as much as 55.6 % of the electorate took part in the referendum and that 75.8 % of them voted yes, 12.5 % no and that 11.7 % of the votes were blank or invalid. If this is a correct indication of the final results, 42.1 % of the electorate will have approved of changing the Act of Succession, which is 2.1 % above the magical 40 % necessary.

http://politiken.dk/politik/article727274.ece

http://nyhederne.tv2.dk/article.php/id-22858449.html?forside

http://politiken.dk/newsinenglish/article727313.ece (in English)

http://jp.dk/indland/article1717073.ece

The exit poll also shows that among those who voted no or cast a blank vote 24.4 % did so because they want to abolish the monarchy, 29 % because they want a more thorough reform of the Constitution, 32.8 % because a change will only have effect in two generations and 25.2 % because they do not find it natural to discuss equality for an institution like the monarchy (those interview could give more than one reason).

http://politiken.dk/politik/article727246.ece

http://www.berlingske.dk/article/20090607/epvalg/90607042/

New hope for the Act of Succession

A new exit poll conducted at 7 p.m., an hour before voting in the Danish referendum on the succession ends, suggests that there is still hope for the Act of Succession. According to this poll 74.3 % have voted yes, 25.7 % no or blank. The expected participation is now 52.4 %, which would mean 39.0 % yes-votes, just 1 % short of the necessary 40 %. The Act might thus be saved if enough people vote during the final hour.

http://politiken.dk/politik/article727232.ece

Exit poll: Act of Succession will fall

An exit poll conducted for Politiken and TV 2 shows that the Danish Act of Succession will not be carried in today's referendum. According to the poll of 1,646 voters 75.5 % have voted yes, 24.5 % no or blank. With a participation of 50.2 % this means that only 37.9 % of the total electorate will approve of the Act, which is 2.1 % below the 40 % limit. Voting ends in an hour, at 8 p.m.

http://politiken.dk/politik/article727104.ece

http://politiken.dk/newsinenglish/article727219.ece (in English)

Voting begins in Denmark

Voting in the referendum on the Act of Succession and the European Parliament elections have started in Denmark. At 10 a.m., one hour after polling started, 7.4 % of the electorate had cast their votes in the referendum and 7.6 % in the European election.

http://politiken.dk/politik/article726980.ece

http://politiken.dk/politik/article727034.ece

The last opinion poll about the succession, conducted on Saturday and published in Politiken and by TV 2 today, shows that 74.8 % will vote yes to changing the Act of Succession. But with only 49 % of the electorate expected to vote, that will not be enough to carry the Act.

http://nyhederne.tv2.dk/kongelig/article.php/id-22851409.html

http://politiken.dk/politik/article726980.ece

In Berlingske Tidende the historians Lars Hovbakke Sørensen and Jes Fabricius Møller comment on the impact a possible “no” may have on the Danish monarchy:

http://www.berlingske.dk/article/20090607/danmark/706060081/

On this date: Prince Joachim turns 40

Today is the 40th birthday of Prince Joachim of Denmark. In Politiken yesterday Peter Thygesen dubbed Prince Joachim “the royal family’s best communicator” and compared his professionalism in his royal role to that of his aunt, Princess Benedikte:

http://politiken.dk/indland/article726912.ece

Berlingske Tidende also had an interesting profile by Mads Kastrup:

http://www.berlingske.dk/article/20090606/danmark/706050082/

On this date: Carl XIII elected King of Sweden

Today is Sweden’s National Day and 200 years ago today, on 6 June 1809, Prince Carl, Duke of Sudermania was elected King of Sweden by the four estates, assuming the name Carl XIII. The Swedish Constitution which remained in force until 1 January 1975 was dated 6 June 1809 and this, and the fact that Gustaf I was proclaimed King of Sweden on 6 June 1523, was the reason why one in 1916 started to celebrate 6 June as the Day of the Swedish Flag. It became the National Day of Sweden in 1983 and since 2005 it is also a public holiday.
Carl XIII came to the throne after the coup which toppled his nephew Gustaf IV Adolf in March 1809. The deposed King’s feeble-minded uncle was asked to be Protector of the Realm while a new constitution was being prepared by the four estates. The estates’ Constitutional Committee held its first meeting on 14 May and a week later the final editing began. Getting the estates to accept it was however more difficult. The peasants were understandably not happy about some of the privileges the new Constitution granted to the nobility, which meant that further burdens were shifted to the peasants.
It had been hoped that the Constitution could be passed on 5 June, so that Duke Carl could be proclaimed King on 6 June, the same date as Gustaf I. As 5 June dawned the peasants still refused to agree to the Constitution. The result was that the three other estates one by one went to the Royal Palace and asked the Duke to accept the Crown of Sweden.
Meanwhile the peasants were put under heavy pressure and at 5 p.m. too came to the Palace and offered the Crown to Duke Carl. But the issue of the controversial § 114 was still unresolved and the peasants had therefore not accepted the Constitution.
At a ceremony in the Hall of State at the Royal Palace on Tuesday 6 June 1809 Duke Carl accepted the four estates’ offer of the Crown of Sweden. He also recognised the new Constitution, but unlike the speakers of the other three estates the Speaker of the peasants’ estate had still not signed it. This they would not do until the second estate had agreed to remove § 114 about the noble privileges.
Their refusal meant that peace negotiations with Russia could not yet start, as Russia had demanded a lawful king and a lawful constitution before they would enter into negotiations with Sweden. It also meant that the new King’s coronation had to be postponed from 15 to 29 June.
In the end Georg Adlersparre, one of the leading men of the March revolution, put heavy pressure on the fourth estate and on 27 June they were commanded to come to the King at the Palace. There King Carl made a speech where he personally promised to negotiate in the issue of the noble privileges and guaranteed that those aspects of the question which were not dealt with during the ongoing assembly would be dealt with next time the four estates met. This finally cracked the peasants’ resistance and there and then the Speaker, Lars Olsson, added his signature to the Constitution, three weeks after the speakers of the other estates.
On 4 November 1814 Carl XIII was also elected King of newly independent Norway, but real power lay in the hands of his adopted son and heir, who succeeded him as King Carl XIV Johan when Carl XIII died in February 1818.
The bust by Johan Tobias Sergel shows a younger Carl XIII.

More on the referendum about the Danish succession

A new poll presented in Politiken today shows that the support for changing the Danish Act of Succession has risen by 2.1 % in two days. The percentage of those intending to vote no or cast a blank vote has fallen from 26.4 to 20.7. But according to the poll only 38.9 % of the total electorate will vote yes, which is 1.1 % short of the magical 40 % limit.

http://politiken.dk/politik/article726488.ece

In Politiken Kjeld Hybel writes about how the referendum on the succession has turned into a referendum on the monarchy itself:

http://politiken.dk/kultur/article726699.ece

In Berlingske Tidende today the priest Kathrine Lilleør argues that the referendum is really a referendum about Queen Margrethe, and that a “no” will mean that one thinks “it would have been better if the Queen had a younger brother so that we had avoided her”:

http://www.berlingske.dk/article/20090605/kommentarer/706050066/

In Berlingske Tidende on Thursday the constitutional expert Peter Kurrild-Klitgaard argued that the Act of Succession should be changed now, so that it can not in the future be used to push through more important constitutional amendments, as happened in 1953:

http://www.berlingske.dk/article/20090603/kommentarer/90603153/

Election disaster for Labour as British cabinet disintegrates

As expected, Thursday’s local elections in Britain turned out to be a disaster for the governing Labour party. With 33 out of 34 districts declared, results show that Labour has lost 268 councillors and are left with only 176. The Conservatives have gained 230 councillors which means they now have 1476, while the Liberal Democrats lost only 4, ending with 473 councillors. For results, see:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/local-election-results-map-2009

The election results come as a further blow to the beleaguered Prime Minister Gordon Brown, who is now left with little if any authority and should now take the consequences of that. Tuesday saw the resignation of four ministers, including Home Secretary Jacqui Smith, while Communities Secretary Hazel Blears announced her resignation on Wednesday morning, followed by Work and Pensions Secretary James Purnell, who quit on Thursday, calling for the Prime Minister to “stand aside to give Labour a fighting chance of winning the next election”. Yesterday Defence Secretary John Hutton also resigned, followed by Transport Secretary Geoff Hoon, Europe Minister Caroline Flint and Wales Secretary Paul Murphy.
This mass defection from the government threw Gordon Brown’s planned reshuffle into disarray. The Prime Minister had reportedly intended to let Business Secretary Peter Mandelson replace David Miliband as Foreign Secretary and to make Education Secretary Ed Balls Chancellor of the Exchequer by removing Alistair Darling. These plans now had to be scrapped as Brown had to concentrate on filling the vacancies left by the mass of departing ministers. As the leader of the Conservatives, David Cameron, said on Wednesday, the cabinet is now reshuffling itself.
Health Secretary Alan Johnson, seen as a likely challenger to Brown’s leadership, was promoted to Home Secretary, while the relatively unknown MP Bob Ainsworth was made Defence Secretary and Glenys Kinnock (wife of former Labour leader Neil Kinnock and mother-in-law of the leader of the Danish Social Democrats, Helle Thorning-Schmidt) became Europe Minister. Yvette Cooper was appointed Work and Pensions Secretary and Lord Adonis Transport Secretary. For an overview of the old and new cabinet, see:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/interactive/2009/jun/05/reshuffle-labour-gordon-brown

While the government itself has been falling apart an e-mail has been circulating in the Labour Party’s parliamentary group, attempting to collect signatures for a letter calling on Gordon Brown to resign. Last evening Brown declared that he would stay on, but it seems doubtful if he will be able to do so. What might yet save him is if no serious challenger steps forward. Ambitious rivals who might otherwise gladly have done so in this situation may be dissuaded by the fact that a general election must be held within a year and that assuming the party leadership now almost inevitably would mean leading the party to defeat.
In my opinion a prime minister who has lost control over his own cabinet is too weakened to lead a country. The Guardian reached much of the same conclusion yesterday: “Any prime minister, however powerful, serves as a member of a cabinet. When that cabinet loses faith in him or her, and its members start saying so in public, the leader cannot stay. […] The truth is that it is all over. To cling to office now would [be] to do the Labour cause, and the country, huge harm. If Mr Brown does not recognise that fact, others will have to do it for him”.

On this date: King Albert turns 75

Today is the 75th birthday of King Albert II of the Belgians. In fact this makes him the oldest Belgian monarch ever. His great-great-grandfather Léopold I died a few days before his 75th birthday, while Léopold II died at 74, Albert I was killed at 58, Léopold III abdicated at 49 and Baudouin I died at 62. Unlike its neighbours Luxembourg and the Netherlands, Belgium has no tradition for voluntary abdications and the King has been in good health after heart surgery in April 2000 while the heir, Prince Philippe, is not very popular.

Oscarshall Palace reawakens – and it is white again!

Recently the scaffolding which has covered Oscarshall Palace in Oslo for several years as the palace has been renovated has started to come down – and reveal that the palace’s façade is now again white, as it was until King Haakon VII after the Second World War approved the suggestion that it should be painted pink.
Oscarshall Palace has been closed to visitors since September 2005 while restoration work has been going on. Modern facilities have also been installed to make the 160-year-old palace better suited to receive visitors. It will open to the public again on 26 August.
The photos show Oscarshall earlier today.

Daniel Westling leaves hospital

Expressen today reports that Daniel Westling last night left hospital following his kidney transplant a week ago.

http://www.expressen.se/Nyheter/1.1593911/har-lamnar-han-sjukhuset

Denmark to vote over succession change

Today is Denmark’s Constitution Day and on Sunday the country will hold a referendum about changing the Act of Succession, which aims at introducing gender-neutral succession to the throne. After 37 years of female rule time now seems ripe for Denmark to introduce full cognatic succession, yet it is uncertain if the plans to do so will succeed.
The bill was proposed to Parliament on 7 October 2008 by the government of the then Prime Minister, Anders Fogh Rasmussen. Its first reading in Parliament was on 23 January this year, followed by the second reading on 17 February and the third on 24 February, at which 107 MPs voted in favour of the change, while 2 abstained. The government’s official website about the referendum:

http://www.tronfoelge.dk/

In Denmark constitutional amendments must be subjected to a referendum, and at least 40 % of the electorate (not just 40 % of those participating in the election) will have to vote yes for the amendment to be passed. The referendum is held together with the elections to the European Parliament and while it seems beyond doubt that a majority will vote in favour of the amendment it seems less certain if the turnout for the election will be sufficient for passing the new Act of Succession. At the referendum about the current Act of Succession in 1953 it was a very close cut, with 45.76 % of the electorate voting in favour at a time when the limit was 45 %.
An opinion poll presented in the newspaper Jyllands-Posten on 9 May showed that 82.5 % of the respondents intend to take part in the referendum and that 87.9% of those will vote yes, while 6.6 % intend to vote no.

http://jp.dk/arkiv/?id=1687815&eceExpr=tronf%F8lgelov%22%20/%3E&eceArchive=o

Another poll in Berlingske Tidende on 29 May showed that 84 % are in favour of the change.

http://www.berlingske.dk/article/20090528/danmark/705280152

If all those people intending to vote do indeed turn out, the amendment will be passed with a comfortable majority, but only 47.8 % of the electorate voted in the previous European Parliament election.
The government’s campaign has meanwhile been heavily criticised for being biased and too simplistic, which has caused some voices to be raised in favour of casting blank votes, including the editor-in-chief of the tabloid EkstraBladet today. Others have expressed their view that the referendum should have been held together with the next local elections rather than the European Parliament elections and some think that there should be larger reforms to the Constitution than just the succession. In recent days the debate about the referendum has also started to turn into a debate about the monarchy itself.

http://www.berlingske.dk/article/20090603/danmark/706030114/

A new poll in Berlingske Tidende yesterday showed that support for the change had fallen dramatically in less than a week to 72 %, with 13 % intending to vote no and 9 % intending to cast blank votes. This means that if less than half the electorate takes part in the referendum the “magical limit” of 40 % will not be reached. The poll also shows that among those who will not vote in favour of the amendment 24 % do so because they are opposed to the change itself, 22 % because they are republicans, 25 % because they want wider constitutional reforms and 25 % for other reasons.

http://www.berlingske.dk/article/20090603/danmark/706030115

Another poll in Politiken yesterday showed a support for the amendment from 74 % of the 1,012 people interviewed, but also found that the percentage intending to vote against or cast a blank vote had risen from 10 to 26 %.

http://politiken.dk/indland/article724666.ece

http://politiken.dk/newsinenglish/article724797.ece (in English)

On 29 May Berlingske Tidende had an article where the historian Jon Bloch Skipper comments on the consequences for how the monarchy is viewed if the bill is not passed:

http://www.berlingske.dk/article/20090528/danmark/705280143

§ 2 of the current Act of Succession of 27 March 1953 says: “On the death of a King the throne shall pass to his son or daughter, a son taking precedence over a daughter, and where there are several children of the same sex the elder child taking precedence over the younger child. […]”.
Before 1953 only men could inherit the Danish throne. At the time King Frederik IX had three daughters and it seemed unlikely that he and Queen Ingrid would have more children. The heir presumptive was therefore the King’s younger brother, Prince Knud, who had two sons and a daughter. Following a referendum the new Act of Succession came into force on 5 June 1953 and meant that Princess Margrethe (now the Queen) replaced Prince Knud as heir to the throne.
The change in 1953 caused a rift between King Frederik and Prince Knud which was never healed. No such thing will happen this time; if the change is approved in Sunday’s referendum it will not affect any living persons. Queen Margrethe II has two sons; Crown Prince Frederik had first a son, then a daughter; while Prince Joachim has two sons from his first marriage and a son from his second. All these will keep their places, followed by the Queen’s sister Princess Benedikte and the Queen’s cousin Princess Elisabeth. But if the Crown Prince has another son, this prince will come after his older sister in the line of succession, rather than surpassing her as he would have done under the 1953 Act of Succession.
The second picture shows King Frederik IX’s signature on the Danish Constitution of 5 June 1953.

Lost treasures: The second Christiansborg Palace, Copenhagen

The second Christiansborg Palace in Copenhagen was built by the architect Christian Frederik Hansen (1756-1845) in the years 1803-1828. It replaced the first Christiansborg, which had burned down in 1794. The following year much of Copenhagen was destroyed in a city fire and in 1807 the British terror bombardment caused much damage to the Danish capital, meaning that large parts of Copenhagen were rebuilt in the neoclassical style. Christiansborg Palace, the Cathedral and the City Hall were the most prestigious commissions and all of them were given to Hansen, who was called to Copenhagen from the Duchies of Schleswig-Holstein.
His was a heavy and monumental neoclassicism of the Roman brand and in his work on the palace he was restricted by the fact that it should be built literally on the ruins of the first Christiansborg. War, financial difficulties and lack of materials meant that work on the new palace proceeded slowly. Hansen’s drawings were approved by King Frederik VI in May 1803, but the work on the exterior was only completed in 1822. Work on the interiors continued for another ten years, while the King’s and Queen’s apartments could be inaugurated in 1828.
Hansen’s closest collaborator was the architect Gustav Friedrich Hetsch, who was twice his son-in-law and who deserves credit for much of the palace’s interiors. The King’s apartment was on the second floor, facing the Palace Square, while the Queen’s apartment was in the west wing on the same floor. The Crown Prince’s apartment was planned one level further up, but the fact that Denmark had no crown prince at the time meant that these rooms were never furnished. On the ground floor the Supreme Court Hall was the only room of significance to be completed.
After the 1794 fire the royal family had moved to the four mansions at Amalienborg and when the new Christiansborg was completed, they chose to remain there. Frederik VI and his family only stayed at Christiansborg for a few days in 1828, when the palace was inaugurated in connection with the wedding of the King’s daughter Princess Vilhelmine Marie and her second cousin Prince Frederik Carl Christian, later King Frederik VII.
Festivities and official ceremonies were those occasions when Christiansborg came to be used. Only Frederik VII made Christiansborg his official residence, but because of the hostility shown by the capital’s upper class towards his morganatic wife, Countess Louise Danner, he preferred to stay at palaces outside Copenhagen, such as Frederiksborg and Jægerspris. Christiansborg was also where the Constituent Assembly which gave Denmark its first constitution met in 1849 and thereafter the Supreme Court Hall became the plenary hall of the new Parliament. Even today Parliament is housed at the third Christiansborg Palace.
The second Christiansborg Palace was lost in a fire which erupted during the night of 3-4 October 1884. The next morning only ruins were left of the once magnificent palace. Only the Palace Church was saved and having been restored after a fire in 1992 it is now the only preserved interior from the second Christiansborg.
It was only in 1907 that work started on the third and present Christiansborg, which has little in common with the second. It was however built on its ruins and many things which had survived the fire were recycled for the third Christiansborg. The King’s Gate in the third photo is partly preserved from the second Christiansborg and what is now the entrance to the Supreme Court (fourth photo) was originally the second palace’s entrance towards the courtyard. Facing Prince Jørgen’s Courtyard the lower parts of the walls (picture 5) are from the second Christiansborg and the four statues by Bertel Thorvaldsen were those placed in niches on either side of the main entrance to the second palace.
The second picture shows a model of what the second Christiansborg looked like. Its façade can be seen in the first photo, which shows a detail of a painting of the old palace which hangs in the City Hall in Copenhagen. A similar painting, done by Heinrich Hansen, can be found at Buckingham Palace.

Norwegian Parliament abolishes its oldest committee

The Norwegian Parliament today voted to abolish its Defence Committee, a change which will come into effect on 1 October. The Defence Committee (formerly called the Military Committee) is the oldest of Parliament's 13 standing committees, dating from 1815, the year after Norway became independent. From October there will be 12 committees and defence issues will be dealt with by the Committee on Foreign Affairs.

European Parliament elections begin

Today the elections to the European Parliament begin. Britain and the Netherlands vote today, the Czech Republic and Ireland tomorrow, Cyprus, Italy, Latvia, Malta and Slovakia on Saturday and the remaining EU countries on Sunday. Some 375 million people in 27 countries have the right to vote for candidates to the 736 seats of the European Parliament, but participation often being low the authorities in several countries have run campaigns to get people to vote.
In Britain the European Parliament election is held together with the local elections, which seem set to be another disaster for Gordon Brown and his Labour government. While Brown’s government is falling apart day by day, recent polls have shown that Labour risks becoming only the fourth biggest party, falling behind the Conservatives, the Liberal Democrats and even the United Kingdom Independence Party. Polls have also shown that the openly racist British National Party may perhaps get a seat in the European Parliament, but hopefully this will be avoided.
Also in Sweden there is some chance that either of three small parties of recent origins may make it to Brussels – the right-wing extremists the Sweden Democrats, Feminist Initiative or the Pirate Party, who wants a more liberal policy on file-sharing. The photo shows Feminist Initiative’s top candidate, Gudrun Schyman, campaigning in Gothenburg on Monday. Schyman was formerly the leader of the Left Party, but co-founded FI in 2005. Despite her personal popularity her new party received only 0.68 % of the votes in the Swedish general election in 2006.

Princess Birgitta to host “summer talk” on Swedish radio

Every summer Swedish Radio broadcast a popular series of “Summer Talks” – each day from mid-June to mid-August a more or less well-known person hosts the programme. Yesterday the list of this year’s “Summer Talkers” was released, also including a royal. Princess Birgitta of Hohenzollern, one of King Carl Gustaf’s sisters, will be on air on 12 July. Formerly Princess Märtha Louise of Norway has also hosted a programme. First out this year is IKEA’s founder Ingvar Kamprad on 20 June and among the other “Summer Talkers” this year are the Finnish and Norwegian Foreign Ministers Alexander Stub and Jonas Gahr Støre on 24 June and 6 July respectively, the author Per Olov Enquist on 19 July and the historian Peter Englund on 31 July.

http://www.sr.se/sida/artikel.aspx?programid=2071&artikel=2873696

http://www.sr.se/sida/artikel.aspx?programid=2071&artikel=2864626

On this date: Start of the 1989 revolution

4 June 1989 should perhaps be counted as the very starting point of the momentous events of 1989 which culminated in the opening of the Berlin Wall in November 1989 and the collapse of the Soviet Empire in December 1991. On 4 June 1989 Poland, as the first East Bloc country, held elections which were very close to being fully democratic, with only a few seats in parliament reserved for the Communist Party. On the same day Ayatollah Khomeini died in Iran and in Beijing hundreds or even thousands of peaceful protesters were killed when the ruthless Communist regime crushed the pro-democracy demonstrations in Tiananmen Square.
New Statesman had an interesting series of articles on “The Year of the Crowd” in its issue of 12 March:

http://www.newstatesman.com/subjects/the-year-of-the-crowd

The Swedish news magazine Fokus also commemorated the events of 1989 in its latest issue last Friday:

http://www.fokus.se/2009/05/tjugo-ar-senare/

What to see: Gustavi Cathedral, Gothenburg

The Gustavi Cathedral in Gothenburg is named for King Gustaf II Adolf, who founded the city in 1621 and also built the first church at the spot. The first church was dedicated in 1633, the year after the King had fallen at Lützen. It burnt down in 1721 and its successor went up in flames during the great city fire of 1802.
The present Gustavi Cathedral was dedicated in 1815, but the interiors and the tower were not completed until 1827. This empire style church was designed by town architect Carl Wilhelm Carlberg (1746-1814), who really got to put his mark on Gothenburg because of the three fires in 1802, 1814 and 1813 which combined destroyed approximately half of the city’s buildings.
The Cathedral is built of yellow brick from Flensburg, while the portico is made of Scottish sandstone. In 1978-1980 the exterior was restored to its original condition and the same was done with the interiors in 1983-1985.