Der Ko-Vorsitzende der Linken und neu gewählte Europaabgeordnete kommentiert die Zusammsetzung des neuen Parlaments.

Im Interview: Lothar Bisky zu den Wahlergebnissen (lange Version)

and to the European Parliament   here in Brussels.

You have been elected into the EP as the   top candidate of Germany's Left party.

In Germany, the Left achieved   a respectable result in the elections,

although it wasn't quite   what people had hoped for.

However, across Europe, as you   pointed out in your post-election speech,

the result for the United Left   was more disappointing.

What are the reasons for the   disappointing performance of the Left?

We had varying results,   depending on the country.

The Portuguese Left bloc   secured three seats

and our performance in France   was also good.

Despite fears   that they wouldn't get in at all,

We improved our position slightly,   while others lost votes.

The Left was particularly strong in Italy,

and the fact that we didn't win a single   seat there is disastrous in my view.

In light of the economic crisis   one would have thought

that left-wing politics   would appeal to the electorate.

What happened in Italy   is beyond my grasp.

I'm absolutely baffled   by Berlusconi's success

and by the demise of the Left,   or rather by their heavy losses.

However, I can say that in Germany   there is a certain apathy towards Europe.

are predominantly   workers and employees,

but also unemployed   and socially deprived people,

and it is difficult to inject these groups   with enthusiasm for the EU.

Another factor was   squabbling within the party,

which began when Sylvia-Yvonne   Kaufmann joined the Social Democrats,

an event which their party leadership   exploited to the full.

This infighting obviously took its toll,   as for the first time in many years

people were under the impression   that the Left was divided,

I noticed that wherever   we began campaigning early

we achieved the respectable results   that we expected.

Let us briefly talk about   the internal squabbling

and Sylvia-Yvonne Kaufmann's   departure from the party.

This wasn't a personal question,   it was about the manifesto.

As an MEP Ms Kaufmann   supported the Lisbon Treaty,

which now seems to be   a taboo subject in your party.

The rejection of the Treaty has become   part of its ideology or dogma.

The situation with André Brie was similar.   There were fundamental differences.

Both Brie and Kaufmann   made a bid for the top candidacy,

but they failed to win   the support of their party.

So it seems that they   intended to differentiate themselves

In André Brie's case I would accept   that party principles played a part,

but I wouldn't share this analysis   in Ms Kaufmann's case.

People have the right to leave   a political party and join another one,

and obviously Ms Kaufmann   is no exception.

But she supports the Lisbon Treaty,   whereas the party rejects it.

When she first stood as our prime   candidate in the European elections,

she promised the party   that she would oppose the Lisbon Treaty.

I always respected the fact   that she changed her mind.

At that time the issue was still   the Constitutional Treaty,

which she helped shape   within the Convention.

That's correct, but she said   that she would vote against it.

As part of the party leadership   she was involved in our careful analysis

of the Lisbon Treaty,   which we rejected in the end.

I always respected and defended the fact   that she supported it,

but if 90% of the party are against it   you have to make a decision.

Let's talk about the Lisbon Treaty   in a more general way.

Across Europe the left-wing parties   view it extremely negatively,

but this didn't help them in the elections.

where the referendum   had resulted in a clear 'No' vote,

There are now   no Irish MEPs for the Left,

as the Sinn Fein candidate   wasn't re-elected.

Isn't the Left's campaign   against the Lisbon Treaty

No, but I understand   that some might disagree.

I have always pointed out   the positive aspects of the Treaty,

but it also contains plans for the   expansion of the EU's military capabilities,

which are unacceptable to any left party.

Social progress is not embedded   within the primary legislation,

and like the Social Democrats   and the Greens we want to change this

in cooperation with   the Confederation of Trade Unions.

We cannot accept the Treaty   without a social progress clause.

and we demand more   direct democracy in Europe.

This doesn't mean that we are   hostile towards Europe or the EU

but unfortunately,   we failed to communicate this adequately.

Parts of the media weren't helpful either,   but I don't want to get into that now.

However, the dogma 'Saying no to Europe   means saying no to the EU' is nonsense,

just like the GDR doctrine 'Supporting   peace means supporting Honecker'.

Such simplistic, pseudo-political   arguments don't serve anybody.

and you are entering the EP   for the first time.

What do you think about   the old accusation

which was often made against the EP   in West Germany 30 years ago:

'If you have a granddad, send him   to Europe'. Does this apply to you?

It does indeed,   but I came to Europe voluntarily.