Elections for the European Parliament: Who should I vote for?

On June 7th 2009 Europeans in all 27 EU member states will go out to vote on the largest transnational election of all time, for the European Parliament. The interest level for these elections among the electorate is at an all-time low. On a Eurobarometer survey, barely a third of voters said they would vote, and 19% said they were certain they wouldn't.
Here in Denmark, where people otherwise are eager to vote on national elections, is no different from the rest of Europe: hardly anyone cares, and information about the elections are conspiciously absent from the news, except when some candidate says something about Turkish membership. All this seems rather odd (not to say hypocritical) to me, since so many people in Denmark complain about lack of democracy in the EU, and then they refuse to vote. And also, people know that the European Parliament is increasingly important for Danish law, but then refuse to even study more about the issues.
While I agree on the general premise that the EU is not good at being transparent and accountable, this fact becomes compounded and justified by the lack of interest: why in the world should the EU be more transparent and accountable if people are so indifferent to it!?
I refuse to fall into this trap, and before I go out to vote on June 7th, I want the candidates to try to charm me; to explain to me what they want in the EU; to show me that they care, and that if they get elected, they will not disappear into a bar in Place Luxembourg for five years (one of the saddest things about MEP's, at least here in Denmark, is how, when elected, you barely hear about them again in any national debate about the EU for the following five years).

I have always been extremely interested in EU issues, and in all modesty, I have an outstanding knowledge of the EU. In this regard, I also have an opinion about the EU, which is probably in line with the center-left in the political spectrum. But this will not determine my vote! I will gladly vote for someone I disagree with as long as I feel that they are hardworking passionate and honest about their work in the Parliament and that they can argue their cases - even if I disagree with them.
Because one thing I know, is that there are no definite answers to anything:
While I understand the need for the Lisbon Treaty and would vote yes to it, I am appalled that they didn't let me vote for it.
While I would vote yes to the Euro, there is nothing bad - and perhaps it is even better - for Denmark not to be in it.
While I want open borders and a more just immigration policy, I understand the weariness of many Danes.
While I think the EU should be a voice of reason in world affairs, I am weary of the superpower tendencies.
While I think EU should expand and be inclusive, I am weary at the prospects for integration in depth.
While I support all initiatives at renewable energy, I am worried about the short-term prospects for EU energy security.
While I think health standards are hugely important, I am worried that they can be hijacked by protectionists.

There are no easy answers!

I have therefore over the last few days started to study the candidates for the EP in Denmark.
I am sure I will not vote based on party affiliation, but will want to give a personal vote. Also, as I mentioned, I will not necessarily decide on someone I agree with, but will look at their arguments.
I started my research on the Altinget website, where there is information on all candidates from the nine registered parties/movements (in Denmark seven traditional parties are running, and two movements, Folkebevægelsen mod EU and Junibevægelsen, which are basically anti-EU movements of diverse political affiliations). There is a link to each candidate where they have been asked a series of very general questions (and some very irrelevant) which is a good starting point; some candidates have not bothered to reply, which immediately disqualified them for my consideration. Some candidates have added comments to their replies, which can be read, which make them more interesting.
Then each candidate has the opportunity for a statement. Many don't, which is ok, but some do, which is a good introduction nevertheless to some of the candidate's main ideas.
Finally, there are links and contacts: many of the younger candidates are on Twitter, Facebook, and most of them have blogs and homepages, some of which are their own, some of which are under the given party. Many homepages are very poor, and some are very good. I have at this point visited every single of the webpages trying to get an overview of the candidates and their opinions.
There are some initial considerations I have made when initally going into this:

I am more critical of known politicians, either current MEP's who are running again, or members of the Danish Folketing, who are running. The latter often seem like people who are "winding down" with the EP, and they often disappear completely in Brussels (a notable exception to this is former Danish Prime Minister Poul Nyrup Rasmussen), and seem to display little practical knowledge of the EU. Conservative Bendt Bendtsen has a very good homepage, but seems out of touch with reality in political life (and this I say because of his "Turkey-complex" and the recent scandal of his trips while minister).
For current members of the Parliament I was even more critical: candidates like Christel Schaldemose (Social Democrat) or Anne Jensen (Venstre), whom I was aware were in the EP, but whom I didn't hear a word from for the last five years! I was not even going to bother with them - although I did visit their web-pages. Others, like the Social Democrat Dan Jørgensen, whom I was not going to bother with either, had such a well-developed and argued page, that i decided to include him anyway.
Hanne Dahl from Junibevægelsen and Johannes Lebech from Radikale both had excellent web-pages with huge amounts of information. Include Margrete Auken from SF, and these three Danish MEPs have been more visible the last period, and are committed and very knowledgeable of the EU and their work. In my view, these three all deserve re-election (that doesn't mean I will vote for them.... I only have one vote!)!

I have a special fondness for young politicians, and as a rule looked at all the candidates under 35. What I was looking for here was if I sensed some passion, which they almost all displayed to a certain degree, but some more than others: Mikkel Schøler from the Social Democrats (really nice and personal homepage), Mette Abildgaard from the Conservatives (who is excellent at using her blog and making it personal, although I did miss some more depth), Lotte Rod from Radikale, and Rina Ronje Kari from Folkebevægelsen mod EU.
Other youngsters were not as passionate, but displayed great knowledge and very clear ideas of what they wanted, where I most liked Sidsel Homann from SF, but also was positively surprised by Dennis Flydtkjær from Dansk Folkeparti. These were much better than some of the young front runners like Emilie Turunen from SF (whose page is boring and with little activity), Sofie Carsten Nielsen from Radikale (whose web-page is a mess where it is really difficult to find any concrete information) or Morten Messerschmidt from Dansk Folkeparti (last time I checked his web-page was not working).
Finally, some of the youngsters were just too boring or with too little depth, and may have to learn more for the future: Louise Feilberg from Venstre seemed nice, but boring; Julie Broe from Conservative focused a lot on free trade, but was otherwise not too clear on other things; Christian Høgedal from Radikale had no working webage, but in everything else I saw about him, he just seemed to be saying all the politically correct things and just smiling a charming smile (may work with the teenagers, but I am more critical); Bente Kronborg Holst from Dansk Folkeparti did just not seem up to date with developments, with little relevance, and too many spelling mistakes on her web-page to make me want to read on.

I also did consider some of the issues and how much they participated in the debate, and on what issues. Some of the top candidates from each party are the ones that are most in the media, albeit with a very superficial and populist message, notably Bendt Bendtsen from the Conservatives, Jens Rohde from Venstre, Søren Søndergaard from Folkebevægelsen and Morten Messerschmidt from Dansk Folkeparti. The top candidate from Liberal Alliance, Benjamin Dickow is notably absent from much debate, and has little information on his party's web-page (he could learn from his party colleague Peter Hjortkjær who has a very nice and informative page).
On some of the issues I have made some limitations, although I remain open to my principle that I will consider all, even if I disagree with them. I did nevertheless make my first cut on the Conservative party, where the only candidate without a "Turkey-complex" seems to be Christian Wedell-Neergaard. Notably the Conservative member of the Folketing Jan Køpke Christensen seems to want to get elected on something he is unlikely to get to work anything on while in the Parliament! Tove Videbæk from the Conservatives is similar, but I decided to include her in my considerations since she did have some clear (but politically correct) issues she wanted to work with.
The inclusion of which issues they want to work with, and the consistency with their opinions was something I tried to look at, but it turned out a mixed thing whether I looked at it. Folkebevægelsen mod EU was an interesting list to look at: they have the longest list of candidates, but half of them have no information at all (I find this strange, although it could be because they just don't want to show up at the parliament) and thus notably absent from the debate. Of course, exceptions are Søren Søndergaard (who is nevertheless not very focused), but also Ditte Staun and Karina Rohr, who both seem balanced, knowledgeable and eloquent, as well as very willing to engage in a debate. This is more than can be said of many in their movement, where there also seem to be many inconsistencies in their viewpoints that range from right- to left-wing (which nevertheless is fair enough, since they are not a party. In fact, they underline my point that this should be a personal vote).
Some candidates display more knowledge of the EU in general than others, and are more detailed in dwelling into some of the issues that they surely will get to work with.
Britta Thomsen of the Social Democracts (who is already in the EP) is focused on health and energy; Anna Rosbach Andersen from Dansk Folkeparti works in the EP already (but her webpage is poorly, "still under construction"); Hanne Dahl from Junibevægelsen on patient-rights and water quality; Lasse Holm Grønning from Radikale on drugs and foreign policy; Bent Claudi Larsen from Venstre on health and energy; Margrete Auken from SF on climate and health (this is common for all front-candidates of SF).
These are all candidates that are passionate and knowledgeable on particular issues and know they can work with them in the parliament. If a person is interested in any of these particular issues and the choice of vote made to depend on this, they are good options.

There are many more candidates that interested me for different reasons, from consistency, particular issues, media-awareness and so on, for instance Morten Løkkegaard from Venstre (a known TV journalist who may attact votes for his fame, but also gives the impression of being quite well-informed); Christine Sidenius from SF (surely the cutest webpage, simple and clear, using her experience being an assitant in the EP); Einer Lyduch from the Social Democrats (who is not well-known, but seemed focused); Kasper Elbjørn from Venstre (who has an excellent blog); Peter Norsk from Conservative (who focuses on international liberalism on his web-page); Anna Elizabeth Kamstrup from Radikale (an apostle of free trade, agriculture and the third world are her main things) and Christian Juhl from Folkebevægelsen (nice web-page with a lot of information on international socialism and labour unions, but less so on EU).

It is very interesting, and gives an overview of the many candidates, but the lack of media attention and informaiton, requires more work before I make a decision.
My next step is to contact each of the candidates I will potentially consider to vote for with a series of specific questions of issues that I feel a personal attachment to and interest for: a few general questions (on the Euro, the Lisbon Treaty and enlargement); on EU's role in the world; on agricultural policy; on fisheries policy; on consumer and health policy; on energy and climate change (which is one of the main issues on the agenda for many of the candidates in Denmark).
Knowing myself, the questions will probably be huge, but that is the idea, and I would like to see how the candidates will react to such questions; at least get a feel that these are issues they consider and have thought about, beyond my personal vanity of wanting to hear their opinion.