Over the past four decades, Parliament has moved from being a mere consultative body to being a genuine co-legislator in a European Union that has itself evolved dramatically from the original Economic Community established by the Treaty of Rome.
There can be no doubt that the introduction of direct elections was a key turning point for the role of the European Parliament, both in the triangular institutional arrangement of the EU and in the process of European integration.
Under the initial system, legislative power was conferred upon the Council of Ministers, with the Parliament acting essentially as a forum, composed of delegations from national parliaments. It was merely entitled to give an "opinion" on a severely limited range of legislative proposals prior to their adoption by the Council and possessed the right to dismiss the Commission with a vote of censure with a two thirds majority.
These powers were considered to be too limited, particularly by those serving in the European Parliament, who claimed that a system in which only government ministers could decide on and adopt legislation suffered from a 'democratic deficit'.
Although the introduction of elections by universal suffrage enhanced its legitimacy and generated more public debate on European issues, the subsequent increase in its powers owed more to the fact that direct elections created a body of full time representatives, willing to press constantly for reforms to the system.
The elected Parliament has indeed been a key driver of European integration. The first elected Parliament (1979-2004), with Altiero Spinelli as Rapporteur, drew up a "Draft Treaty on European Union" which triggered the negotiations which led to the Single European Act, and, subsequently, the treaties of Maastricht , Amsterdam and Nice. In each and every one of these treaties, the powers of the Parliament were increased, as was the field of responsibilities of the institutions, transforming the old European Community of the 1960s and 70s into the more sophisticated (and wider) European Union we know today.
Many of the treaty changes took up precise proposals of the Parliament, not least as regards its own powers. The "co-decision" procedure, whereby European legislation is adopted by Parliament and Council (in what amounts to a bi-cameral legislature), is a striking example. Another is the political link between the Commission and the Parliament, whose terms of office now coincide, with each new Parliament able to accept or reject first the President and then the whole college of the Commission.
Most recently, the draft Constitutional Treaty was negotiated on the basis of the text prepared by the Convention on the Future of Europe, a body set up at Parliament's instigation and involving both MEPs and members of national parliaments. Although it is not clear how much of this treaty will eventually be ratified, it, too, increases the powers of the European Parliament.
It seems a paradox that, as the powers of the Parliament increased, turnout in European elections has declined, from an average of 63% in 1979 to 46% in 2004. However, this decline has actually been less marked than the decline in turnout in national elections in many countries.
The turnout is actually comparable to mid-term congressional elections in the US and has been far higher than for local elections in many European countries. It certainly confounded the many pessimists who predicted 25% turnout.
Another concern is that the campaigns have tended to primarily be domestic. Indeed, European elections have tended to be more a set of different national campaigns than of co-ordinated Europe-wide campaigns, with the elections seen as a test of the popularity of incumbent governments (and oppositions). Even so, European issues have steadily come more to the forefront of the debates during election campaigns relating to specific policy matters such as EU environmental and social legislation or to the EU's general development and direction of travel. Several of the main political groups including the Socialists, EPP, Liberals and Greens have campaigned on common manifestoes, although the use of these manifestoes at national party level is still highly variable.
I recently attended a conference on the development of the Andean Parliament, and was struck by the fact that, while as Europeans we view our Parliament as a still developing body, from the perspective of an outsider the European Parliament is the prototype with which every supranational parliament will be compared with. For the European Parliament is unique as the world's first transnationally elected Parliament. This 'political miracle' has also been extraordinarily dynamic in a way that many national parliaments have ceased to be.
A distinguishing feature of the EP is that it does not regard itself as being part of a completed institutional framework, but as one that has evolved and will continue to evolve. Hence, the development of our Parliament will mirror that of our Union.