The Role of Ideology in Boundary Maintenance Of

CEU eTD Collection

T In requirements for fulfillmentof the thedegree partial of HE M R AINTENANCEOF OLE OF Supervisor: Pr Department ofPolitical Science Central European University Budapest, Hungary I Maria SedlakovaMaria DEOLOGY IN Submitted to ofessor Zsolt Enyedi 2013 By

E UROPARTIES

OUNDARY

Master of ArtsMaster of

CEU eTD Collection measures (Hungariapplied were not SMER cases two inclu or selective how influence that factors identifies andEuropean levelatthe analytical organizations describesthe partychapterof part extent what to and how also thus and party) decision the within finance, party staff, party party, the of (size Europarties the of structure regulations, and rules internal Europarty the within function and accepted are they once do to have they what and Europarty the to accepted be to order partie member national Eur examines paper The A BSTRACT o parties - D in SD

studies . The focus of the analysis is on the relationship between the Europarties and their their and Europarties the between relationship the on is analysis the of focus The

2006 : one when discipli when one : Europarty applies Europarty

rm h Pry f uoen Socialists European of Party the from h rl o pry dooy in ideology party of role the ,epcal ntecniin ta ainl ate aet flil in fulfill to have parties national that conditions the on especially s, . Based on the qualitative content analysis of the party statute party the of analysis content qualitative the on Based h ppr rus ht dooy nlecs organizational influences ideology that argues paper the an party Europarty treats its applicants and applicants its treats Europarty nary measures were applied ( applied were measures nary control mechanism such as disciplinary measures disciplinary as such mechanism control Fidesz, 2012 Fidesz, sive Europarties are. Second part focuses on the on focuses part Second are. Europarties sive i

boundary maintenance of thirteen thirteen of maintenance boundary and theEuropean People’s Party ad n wee disciplinary where one and ) suspension of suspension

members and wh and members Slovak party Slovak - making making . ether ether F ). irst irst

s, s,

CEU eTD Collection Veronika,Brian. Samuel and intellect enjoyable thank to want I Finally, InternationalFund Visegrad and Commission Furthermore, Katarina Nevedalova From opinions. and experience their Mr. thank time goes gratitude My politics. Enyedi without possible be not would project This A CKNOWLEDGMENTS , xrse ter neet n hs project. this in interest their expressed I am I .

Christian Kremer and Kremer Christian y rttd ge to goes gratitude my grateful numerous

a journey ual to those political elites who elites political those to

and BoguslawLiberadzki.and o his for

l my all

for the support in 2012/2013. for thesupport 2012/2013. in icsin about discussions

valuable

n experience. and Nikolas Briec Nikolas red ad olaus from colleagues and friends

the ail I. Daniel comment Party of European Socialists European of Party the the ii From

ugra politi Hungarian for their for

o hs nie sois rm h Eur the from stories insider his for n spite in guidance of my supervisor, supervisor, my of guidance s, time time s, pca tak g to go thanks Special

the

uoen epes at, wn to want I Party, People’s European availability and willingness to share to willingness and availability n cnaiu psin abou passion contagious and of the amount of work and lack of lack and work of amount the of

the cs . I also want to thank the the thank to want also I E cmuiy for community CEU , my thanks go to Ms. Ms. to go thanks my my family, Mina, Mina, family, my rfso Zsolt Professor party t opean opean an an

CEU eTD Collection Bibliography 6. Conclu 5. Case stu 4. 3. 2. 1. List ofAbbreviations List ofTables and Figures Table of content Acknowledgments Abstract T ABLE OF

5.2. European PartyFidesz 2012 and People’s 5.1. PartyEuropean and Socialists SMER of 4.3. 4.2. 4.1. 3.1. 2.2. 2.1. 4.2.4. 4.2.3. 4.2.2. 4.2.1. The Data Empirical onEuroparty Analysis Organizations: 3.1.3. 3.1.2. 3.1.1. ResearchDesign and Methodology 2.1.3 2.1.2. 2.1.1. Europarties: Dif with Organizations Introduction

...... Methods and Data Conceptual Framework Theoretical Framework TheIdeology: of Role Party Discussion W ThreeBoundary Maintenance Dimensionsof sion .

dy hat influences boundarymaintenance? CONTENT

......

Party Staff Party and Structure Membership Size The useof data interview Case studies Analysis AnalysisDocuments Content ofand Formal and Rules Organizations ImpactIdeology of onParty Structure ConnectingBoundaryInternal to Maintenance Party Structure PartyFinance Party S

......

...... tructure: Decision

......

...... -

...... making the Party Within

...... ferent Structures ...... iii ...... - SD 2006 SD ......

......

62 60 52 49 49 45 44 43 41 36 36 34 34 30 29 27 27 27 23 22 20 15 12 12

iii vi

ii 8 v

CEU eTD Collection C Appendix B Appendix A. Appendix

......

...... iv

......

88 87 68

CEU eTD Collection Table 5. Party ratioand staff staff ofEuroparties Table 4 Table 3. Table 2. Table 1. Operationalizationof “selective/inclusive” partyFigure ofthefamilies 1.Position L IST OF .

Membership structure by country: EPP and PES comparedMembership PES structure byand country: EPP Boundary mai Boundary ofEuropartie maintenance T ABLES

AND ntenance ofEuroparties ntenance F IGURES

s v

summary

CEU eTD Collection LSDSP HZDS GUE/NGL Greens/EFA Fidesz EUD EUCD EU EPP EP ELDR EL EGP EFD EFA EDU EDP ECR ECPM EC EAF DSS ALDE AENM AECR L IST OF

BBREVIATIONS

Alliance ofEuropean and Conservatives Reformists Latvian Workers' Democratic Party Social People’s Party EuropeanLeft United European Greens Hungarian Union Civic EUDemocrats European Democrats Christian Unionof European Union European Party People’s European Parliament Communities FederationLiberal, of Democratic and Par Reform PartyLeftEuropean of European Green Party EuropeFreedomDemocracy of and EuropeanFree Alliance European Union Democratic European Party Democratic European Conservatives European Movement Political Christian European Commission European Freedom Alliancefor Democratic ofSerbia Party AllianceLiberalsDemocrats of Europe and for Allian ce Movements ofEuropean National

–

Movement forMovement a Slovakia Democratic – EuropeanAlliance Free

–

Nordic Green Left GreenNordic

and Reformists

ties ofthe European

CEU eTD Collection UDF SOC SNP SMER S&D PNTCD PES MELD MDF

Party LibertiesMovementof for a and Europe Democracy Hungarian Forum Democratic Union of theDemocraticForces Parties ofConfederation theEurope Socialist of the NationalSlovak Party Direction Progressive and Alliance Socialists Democrats of Christia

of European Socialists of n -

Democratic Peasants’National –

Social Democracy vii

Party

an Community

CEU eTD Collection 2004/2003) (No Council and EP the is party European the of functioning whereas the leve European and national (at parties of forms Both Parliament European partie European transnational m The between parties member respective and thenational their Europarties? m with problems potential address to mechanism they do Why silence. Fide People’ European the to opponents are that parliament by attacked was he time, in the developments of political Most current Hungary. the explain to purpose: same the with times multiple Or Viktor Minister Prime Hungarian 2011 Since 1.

functioning of functioning I s NTRODUCTION belongs z ladi Orb This, all. at democracy no prof this be personally represent I to but now, free quote are will there or will Europe in democracyChristian a be either we therewill that view Schumann’s I and what with position, disagree European may a You less conviction. no is position this but Europe, minorityin a in are we this with that beIt may one. European a less no position makes that but otherwise, believe are people many great a that be ideals may It future. the of Our foundations the are families either. that believe we and House thing, positive and important this an be to in support majority enjoy und not do represent we ideals the unfortunately that accept must community, political our and me, like People jrt of ajority oubtedly Christian and based on personal responsibility; we find national sentiment national find we responsibility; personal on based and Christian oubtedly a n

in EP . n h ohr ad t hand, other the On

a 2012) oiia pris in parties political national political par political national

ih a with

not respond to the criticism of their opponents? opponents? their of criticism the to respond not .

iia ielgcl profile ideological similar ( s rm o o “Europarties” on now from . he It might be clear why political parties want to join and join to want parties political why clear be might It h E mme states member EU the ty is regulated by the by regulated tyis P pry ru ad t rsetv Erpry keep Europarty respective its and group party EPP s n gnlmn i a European a is gentlemen, and es 8 (

to some extent some to ba ember parties? And w And parties? ember n has visite has n h rpeettvs of representatives the l) are political organizations political are l) frig so forming , Pry EP where (EPP) Party s d the European Parliament European the d ) legislature at the national level, national the at legislature )

and defined by the regulations of regulations the by defined r as mmes of members also are party party - ald “ called

hat is the relationship the is hat Do they have any any have they Do rus wit groups party position at families party Orban’s party party Orban’s

, however, , groups in in groups

i the hin ( Viktor

(EP) our the the ess ess ” .

CEU eTD Collection explanation, p ofthe affiliation transnational the ofpredicting success more problem be to “appears where Europe, Eastern and is Central the exception However, 2012). (Bressaneli; affiliation” “ findsthat Bressanelli barometer euro data, 2009 model the on logit multinational applying By the EP. in group the influential most and the largest by advanced joining better are goals pragmatic offices and that isargued it morepragmatic: that matters and party member ofthe compatibility policy and ideological isthat argument Traditional Parliament. identifies Pragmatism?” Ideologyor 1 whether making the within organizationa 2012), in Fidesz and EPP 2006; in SMER and (PES studies case two and MELD) and AENM ECPM, EUD, EAF, EFA, EDP, EL, AECR, EGP, inclus is: project this guiding question research main The of problem the on light empirical the and theoretical the to belonging of discipline the on literature of lack a is there however, Bardi 2002; (Kreppel scholars membe individual the of discipline Party the to adhere maintain to hard be may level EU the units independent still “Europ same the to belonging Although parties have todo p European the to accepted be to order in fulfill to have they what especially federa party transnational between relationship the of analysis within remain For example Edoardo Bressanelli in “National Parties and Group Membership in the European Parliament: Parliament: the European in Membership Group and Parties “National in Bressanelli example Edoardo For a national party joins joins party national v Erpris are? Europarties ive and to what extent and to see for example Enyedi, 2006. Enyedi,2006. example for see l structure of structure l proclaimed values, g values, proclaimed

h tasainl oiia structure political transnational the

once once party) and also thus party) rnntoa Europ transnational ideology or policy compatibility is the most important factor behind a party transnational partya transnational behind most factor important the is policy compatibility or ideology the the at the national level level national the at they atic” compared to the west European parties (for the “new” parties he reports 58.7% 58.7% he reports theparties “new”(for parties westthe European to compared atic” political group that best matches itsprogram matches that best group political

Europ a

ae o te td o tite Erpris EP PS ALDE, PES, (EPP, Europarties thirteen of study the on Based are accepted and function within thebroaderare within acceptedandEuropean function structure. Europ

two main reasons why reasonsmain two 2005) e.g. by party cohesiveness measured by roll by measured cohesiveness party by e.g. 2005) arties oals or “ideology” of the party the of “ideology” or oals arty

how arty

(size of the party, party sta party party, the of (size applies e , arty rs of the European Parliament is widely studied widely is Parliament European the of rs specially Tu, h am f hs rjc i t se both shed to is project this of aim the Thus, . a and th and ” Europ

9 and party family party and arties compared to 71.4% in 71.4% to compared arties any kind of “disciplinaryanykind ofmeasu

a 1 us, “di us, national party join nationaljoin party

arty

bt ite teto hs en ad o the to paid been has attention little but , when when “ boundary maintenance boundary

treats its its treats I argue that ideology influences influences ideology that argue I What determines how selective or or selective how determines What the the scipline” within the organization at at organization the within scipline” a national member party as a party party a as party member national national member member national matic position. Another explanation is Anotherexplanation maticposition. tions and their member parties, parties, member their and tions , national member parties are parties member national , applicants andapplicants

the group in the group the ff, party finance, decision finance, party ff, at the European/ the at Western Europe). For more For Europe). Western ” the

of Europarties. of party does does party res” arty and what and arty members European European ideological fit ideological - . call votes, call EU level. EU

and not the by

CEU eTD Collection government 2 about debate T wereconducted. addit in and articles and documents of analysis qualitative Europarties, or regulations internal and statutes structure. party internal and staff anal are Europarties thirteen structureof status/ the of status membership identify to important is it party, national the the analyze to order In national ofview level of from disciplinary the point as describe measures, the on and levelEU the on parties political between relationship the about literature the gapin credeinternational groups party European the h topic the potential. “blackmail” tool threa a that is study to relevant it unique, national party and First, reasons. several for puzzling is topic The

For example, For he structure of this paper is paper this of structure he violation of its internal rules and what are the factors that factors the are what and rules internal its of violation

to influence (and influence to disci has with xenophobic part xenophobic with as broader implications for implications broader as lnr maue wr applied. were measures plinary ion, semi ion,

suspension of SMER of suspension

never never Europarties

a ntial, loca ntial, how selective or inclusive the Europarties are Europarties the inclusive or selective how E been properly studied and analyzed. The The analyzed. and studied properly been - urop structured elite interviews with representatives of the EPP and the PES the and EPP the of representatives with interviews elite structured potentially change potentially Hence

arty national ih h fcs n h fcos tha factors the on focus the with ySNP. l affiliates etc. (Enyedi 2006) (Enyedi etc. affiliates l

, it i it ,

the the n Europarties and -

SD were in an were inan t of suspension and and suspension of t following:

s important to understand the mechanism behind it. Third, it. behind mechanism the understand to important s was usedto was member The data were obtained through the content analysis of of analysis content the through obtained were data The party politics i politics party yzed ) ideological conflict. politics on the on politics

give the signal that signal that the give parties parties First, I provide provide I First,

ec, h dt o itra ognzto and organization internal on data the Hence, with the focus on party size, party finance, party party finance, party size, party on focus the with 10

) h f the 1) still does matter matter does still

there have been numerous examples numerous been have there exclusion when cases the 2) n ra rls f Europ of rules ormal Eastern Europe, where membership in in membership where Europe, Eastern

national level national . Fourth, . party party the

may be in some cases used as a a as used cases some in be may my nlec organizationa influence may t s Although such a situation is not Althoughnot a is situation such influence membership status of status membership influence econd reason why this topic is topic this why reason econd theoretical background to the the to background theoretical should reconsider reconsider should , how ,

o is eortc image, democratic its for I believe that there is there that believe I change of membership membership of change 2 Euro

and thus, and d above. d arties party responds to responds party form

may have a have may concerning concerning ation of the of ation

when

real a l

CEU eTD Collection measures ( applied were not ( applied were measures disciplinary the inclusive le European the at organizations the parties. the of structure

analytical Europarties

part of the paper paper the of part Theen I describe I Theen are EPP and EPP .

The last The

e ad identi and vel that PES Fide part of the research focuses on the two cases: one when one cases: two the on focuses research the of part

presents and the methodology used in the analysis the in used methodology the

in 2013 11 SMER

is atr that factors fies

the data and the analysis of the the of analysis the and data the ).

in 2006 in

) and one where disciplinary disciplinary where one and ) nlec how influence , followed by by followed , eetv or selective party

CEU eTD Collection groups. party instance, for Bardi, Luciano Europ the on system party the that evidence little is there most structures, groups party European the on only focus transnational scholars and parties national between relationship the Concerning system. party supranational and Parliament European the on debate the of context broader 2007, discus extensively are parliament European the within groups party especially and parties political European are arepresented usedstudyand inthis operationalized. organization the within party on literature the Next, structure. internal party’s the to connectedness its and maintenance boundary of concept the to moves and Europarties of definition the with starts chapter the thesis, nature. their in complex are phenomena social the of most since reader, the frustrate not shall This systems. party national on Europeanization of impact formal families party and parties th maintenance, boundary Europarties’ the Analyzing chapter. analytical the to proceeding before addressed be to question research main The 2.

2.1. E

UROP ideology and its possible impact on party organization is presented. Finally, formal rules Finally, formal presented. partyis organizationon impact possible its and ideology 2011; Hix & Hoyland 2011; etc.). Much of the research the of Much etc.). 2011; Hoyland & Hix 2011; this chapter present chapter this rules

Theore

ARTIES in organizations in

H claim e tical Framework e i te ieaue Kepl 02 Bri 05 Hx Lord & Hix 2005; Bardi 2002; (Kreppel literature the in sed :

O s

ta the that s RGANIZATIO are briefly discussed. In the second part of the chapter, the of part second the In discussed. brieflyare , b) , s outlined in the introduction the in outlined , the argues that there are several reasons why scholars focus on EP on focus scholars why reasons several are there that argues and on party organization (sociology) organization party on theoretical framework framework theoretical in addition, the li the addition, in European

NSWITH is research is 12 rnntoa ognztos per o e “very be to appear organizations transnational

within the EP, arguing that outside the EP, the outside that arguing EP, the within combines the combines IFFERENT

terature on terature

inevitable inevitable touches upon several topics that need need that topics several upon touches

ean level exists (e.g. Kreppel Kreppel (e.g. exists level ean G S other broad topic broad other vn the iven

, c) , TRUCTURE has naturally been set in the the in set been naturally has literature for further analysis. Thus, analysis. further for

on party ideology party on limited limited on a on

S phenomenon of of phenomenon

) concepts that concepts s transnational cp o th of scope

such as the as such 97 Hix 1997; , d) , 2002).

on e

CEU eTD Collection to Article 3: sati which parties political of alliance an or party their of funding.According tothe Regulation, purpose the for primarily created 2003, November from Council and Parliament 2004/2 No (EC) Regulation in found be can level European the at parties 1970s) firs were The Parliament. European the in groups party and further proceeding Before members on not is focus their However, (ELDR). Communities European (SOC) Community party Part on People Handbook European’s Data their in (1992) Mair organizations, & Katz by provided is information some have do still we Nevertheless, 51). 2002, (Kreppel accessible easily not sometimes are rules internal that is it behind reason practical the but impossible” groups party the of […] study analytical rigorous that argues whic EP, the outside a For d be also are and resources material better have that groups party EP the to compared when organization internal and finance staffing, access, media of point the from institutions” weak eveloped (Bardi similar reason, little little reason, similar and they operate outside the EuropeanParliament.the outside theyoperateand tly formed as transnational party federations before the first elections of the EP (mid EP the of elections first the before federations party transnational as formed tly but rather onth but rather the the

hr te dsrb i dti tre rnntoa Erpa parties: European transnational three detail in describe they where noml aue f h internal the of nature informal 2002). n Fdrto o Lbrl Dmcai ad eom ate o the of Parties Reform and Democratic Liberal, of Federation and srrsnl apis lo to also applies surprisingly h aa bu te oml tutrs n rules and structures formal the about data (P) Cneeain f h Scait Parties Socialist the of Confederation (EPP), y

e organizational ofemerging structure per se. Europarties i i iprat o mhsz te ifrne ewe Europarties between difference the emphasize to important is it , is

known about the internal rules and regulations of the Europarties the of regulations and rules internal the about known a p olitical party at European level is definedasparty political atolitical is European level 13

sfies certain conditions. Those are according according are Those conditions. certain sfies ue ad rcdrs mks large a “makes procedures and rules “Europarties”

uoen at gop. me Kreppel Amie groups. party European The f The irst legal definition of politicalof legal definition irst

that this paper is referring to referring is paper this that how Europarties treat their their treat Europarties how

f uoate. I Europarties. of 003 of 003 f h European the of the

European mportant - scale, tter tter the the -

CEU eTD Collection di three at looks approach second The 1995). Mair & (Katz etc. finance, party organs, party internal of organization power, of distribution staff, party of allocation and numbers found becan a party sees approach first approaches different two propose organize parties how & Luther in (Bardi office” central in “party represent organizations) parliamentary (extra Europarties and office” public in “party to correspond EP the in groups party ground”, the on “party to equivalent to correspond level European at structures of types three Bardi, Luciano to According EP. the in groups party and Europarties parties, national other: each with cooperate that units different three co inevitably we Europarties, of maintenance boundary analyze to order in Hence, Greens/EFA, GUE/NGLand ECR, (see EFD 2011) Hoyland, Stea and Coal European the of Assembly the in formed older, groups Political MELD. and AENM ECPM, EUD, EAF, EFA, EDP, EL, AECR, EGP, ALDE,PES, EPP, EP: that quali thereare Europarties currently thirteen By definition, this e (d) respectand fundamentalfreed human rights for founded,which is principles theEuropean namely Union ofliberty, the democracy, (c) observe, itmust programmeand the inits activities, in particular principles inits on most States, atleast three cent each ofthevotes ofthoseStates per castin at Member the haveregional must least received, assemblies, onequarterMember inat of orit the European Parliame be(b) must represented, inatleast it Member onequarter of States,of by Members the (a) have itmust legalseat inthewhichits Member located; personality is State xpressed the(Articlexpressed todoso (EC) intention No 2004/2003). 3,Regulation it must have must it participatedinelections theEuropean to orhave Parliament, recent in their Data Handbook (1992): development and structure of party structureofmembership, and development (1992):Handbook Data their in

Katz and Mair’s “three faces” of party organiza party of faces” “three Mair’s and Katz

Crety tee r svn oiia gop i te P EP SD ALDE, S&D, EPP, EP: the in groups political seven are there Currently, . on the other hand function within the European Parliament and thus and Parliament European the within function hand other the on European elections; Parliament Muller nt or in thenationalorregionalor Parliaments inthe nt orin Parliaments - s a unitary actor and allows the researcher the allows and actor unitary a s Rommel

20 02, 296). In this sense, Katz and Mair in their work on on work their in Mair and Katz sense, this In 296). 02, Table A1inAppendixTable 14

oms, andthe rule ofoms, law;

to study to tion. He sees national parties as parties national sees He tion. l Community in 1953 (Hix & (Hix 1953 in Community l ing fy for the funding from the funding the fy for ).

party organizations. The The organizations. party

to study everything study to

me across across me

are fferent

also that

CEU eTD Collection al separation the where another, “activities to refers maintenance social and term The answer Europarties. about the question at level, Europarty officeoften holdan that fact the Despite repr structures. are Europarties and rules different with organizations distinct two are EP the in group party its and Europarty that fact the underlined EP the of members contacted par respective and parties member their unites that actor one as Europarty the see EP the in groups party nor parties national neither that is research the of course the during emerged has that observation interesting One memberwith its parties. how analyzes and approach faces” “three employs studies) (case study empirical the of part second The structure. organizational u allows Moreover, party. national of analysis the for applied often those as tools similar with Europarty every and each analyze to us allows it twofold: are approach unitary each analysis, empirical the of as part analyzed is Europarty first the In approaches. both combines study This they interacteach with other. how analyzes and organization) party of faces” “three mentioned (above party the of elements .

1997, 2.1.1. t cmae uoate ad hs se h dfeecs n smlrte i their in similarities and differences the see thus, and Europarties compare to s “ - 201). boundary psyc

Connecting hological to social to hological The simplest definition of “boundary” is given by Anthony P. Cohen, Cohen, P. Anthony by given is “boundary” of definition simplest The - parliament of members that and groups party their by EP the in esented maintenance” is frequently used in frequentlyused is maintenance”

a “unitary B oundary oundary

may be between individuals or between gr between or individuals between be may - used to maintain maintain to used scientific actor” with different internal structure. The advantages of of advantages The structure. internal different with actor” a y ru i te P O te contrary, the On EP. the in group ty Europarty M

contacted aintenance studies. 15

( members of the EP did not feel competent to competent feel to members theEPdidnot of n o oeetn at group party a extent some to and

According to Lowenthal etLowenthal to According the to I a nternal nternal se variety ofvariety aain ewe oe ytm and system one between paration P arty arty fields S tructure the the oups” (Lowenthal et (Lowenthal oups” from psychological psychological from unitary approach unitary the

al .,

aoiy of majority

boundary )

interact -

CEU eTD Collection sub internal “ leaves it where and also sec internal organization’s of (interdependence systemness of degree and environment) external its to relation (in autonomy scales: two on measured is which institutionalization” of “degree by presented the to connected to attention reader’s the focus me let discussed, is structure represents. it “identity” the Instinctively, itself. 168). and groups to come and over struggle even and practices, people, boun segregation”Molnar& 2002,(Lamont 169). More “i into example for translated social b the between distinguishes literature The distinguished” be to wish or are, they which “from entities) other (or other each with interact Communities beginnin the marks boundary “the whom to according nenl tutrl oeec o te organization the of coherence structural internal more defined more daries, defined as “conceptual distinctions made by social by made distinctions “conceptual as defined daries,

n hs es, onais f uoate ae yblc cntutd y h Europarty the by constructed symbolic, are Europarties of boundaries sense, this In oundaries represent formsoundaries ofsocial diff represent - generate feelings of similarity and group memb group and similarity of feelings generate groups can act autonomousl act can groups

voters

Panebianco, (Cohen 1985, 12). (Cohen 1985,

at’ itra srcue the structure: internal party’s boundaries and thus, it is possible to identi to possible is it thus, and boundaries

off tend to tend ” (Panebianco 1988, 56). The degree of systemness is measured by the by measured is systemness of degree The 56). 1988, (Panebianco ”

agree upon definitions of reality” which “[…] “[…] which reality” of definitions upon agree h hpteie ta political that hypothesizes who differentiate one differentiate eoe h ipc o te at ielg o te organizational the on ideology party the of impact the Before tors). In his view, organizations that are more more are that organizations view, his In tors). ie n sae o “ol b wih niiul ad gr and individuals which by “tools or space” and time etfal pten o social of patterns dentifiable

y (heterogeneous organization) and vice versa, high high versa, vice and organization) (heterogeneous y social boundaries and symbolic symbolic and boundaries social party from another by its ideological position, or position, ideological its by another from party 16 erences among the

degree of of degree

” motn fr hs eerh r symb are research this for important

o dge o ssens mas that means systemness of degree low ad h ed f community”. a of end the and g ership” (Lamont & Molnar 2002, Molnar & (Lamont ership” institutionalization.

fy “where it it “where fy ate dfe acrig to according differ parties the xlso o cas n racial and class or exclusion actors to categorize object categorize to actors the

communities communities other factor other organization’s degr organization’s separate people into into people separate [ organization boundaries, where where boundaries, autonomous

that

hs iw is view This hc are which

is directly directly is ]

starts ee of of ee oups have

olic olic the s,

CEU eTD Collection structuring organization the within alliances or conflict power, of role are factors technical that argues he Although of number as labels Panebianco that factors are analysis this for important More and institutionalized. research further the to contribute may study the at However, addressed. primarily institutionalization not is level party European of degree the are, Europarties the inclusive or selective how “we as classify scholars that organizations the Europarties, on concept same the apply we can for created concept Panebianco’s that emphasize to important is It the sources, national the throughout structure organizational who those are parties institutionalized highly Thus, structure. power actual and norms statutory deg the 5) and organizations, collateral external with relations 4) finance, of sources 3) level, hierarchical same the at structures organizational of extra the of development of degree of indicators five identifies also Panebianco groups(Panebianco 1988 sub organization’s of interdependency and control centralized implies systemness of degree party’s statutory norms a k institutions” k 1) 4) 4) i n this area since it provides it since area this n have have

dominate analysis of parties at national level. Thus, the question is question the Thus, level. national at parties of analysis party’s party’s at organizati party a el eeoe cnrl ueurtc apparatus, bureaucratic central developed well

irrhcl ees sz o th of size levels, hierarchical (Bardi 2002) (Bardi

over the external organizations external the over

, 56

(Panebianco 1988 ). n Pnbac 1988 (Panebianco on

? Since the focus of this study is on the factors that influence that factors the on is study this of focus the Since - parliamentary organization, 2) the degree of homogeneity of degree the 2) organization, parliamentary data on all Europarties, whether more or less developed less or more whether Europarties, all on , 58 17 of secondary importance when compared to compared when importance secondary of a

territory party - 59 ognzto, nenl pcaiain etc. specialization, internal organization, e

). , 5) , 183 ,

’ dge o institutionaliza of degree s

and , 3) 3) , ree of correspondence between the the between correspondence of ree

. mn te ot important most the Among ).

of with plurality of regular of plurality with their

, party they still still they actual power corresponds to to corresponds power actual

to what extent (if at all) at (if extent what to ntttoaiain w institutionalization “technical” 2) have homogenous homogenous have o play do , such as such , in 1 the 1) tion:

a financial financial oe in role the the the as -

CEU eTD Collection ways opposing two in bureaucratization affects size that argues Panebianco Moreover, 187). 1988, (Panebianco authority the of centralization and bureaucratization the of in increase the to leads increase organization the Hence, organization. the within labor of division higher since participatory) more are organizations influences also size Party cohesion. if as act and believe leaders the because (also exists that imply necessarily not neither large 187), 1988, (Panebianco attain to easier are ranks organizational tight and values political “shared organizations level different the for accounts bureaucratization large and small and between difference the members, that argued is of It 1988). (Panebianco participation/mobilization party, the of cohesion internal the to variable) independent an (as party the of size the relates literature party The Party size selective/inclusive are Europarties independe possible P that factors p its and environment the vis are organization party influence that technicalities the - ie gop. oee, aeino rus that argues Panebianco However, groups. sized a eainhp ewe te raiains ie n pltcl ooeet “probably homogeneity political and size organization’s the between relationship sufficient nor sufficient

: one of the most important the: onefactors of anebianco and others (e. g. Katz & Mair) identify Mair) & Katz g. (e. others and anebianco t aibe ta ifune the influence that variables nt

the the t tmlts vertical stimulates it a necessary condition and thus, and condition necessary small and highly centralized group centralized highly and small nenl c internal the oesoaiain (Panebianco rofessionalization s ).

atcpto ad oiiain f t mmes (small members its of mobilization and participation

of organizations’ internal cohesion. Because in small small in Because cohesion. internal organizations’ of hso o te raiain Nvrhls, e concludes he Nevertheless, organization. the of ohesion the

and horizontal horizontal and 18 ? increased number of members usually implies implies usually members of number increased

the size of the party, its relationship vis relationship its party, the of size the eedn vral o ti rsac ( research this of variable dependent

it exists) and affects the level of internal internal of level the affects and exists) the the small size of the organization does organization the of size small ml sz o te raiain is organization the of size small s are usually more cohesive than than cohesive more usually are s differentiation, 92. n hs ae I a I paper this In 1982).

as important, since they are they since important, as

hc rsls in results which the organization s z o the of ize nalyze nalyze [ … how how - ]” à ” s -

CEU eTD Collection expu or 3 ideology, decision parties member and applicant with size, party the Besides votes inthe European Parliament. media w party the measures view, this In supporters). potential environment (“catch social success different electoral to or penetration members) of number the on depends funding state of amount the (when state the from aid financial receiving as such goals certain d be could organization the of size the control to leaders want why reasons The 190). 1988, (Panebianco recruitment” membership with “tampering through boundaries”) organizational over (“control organization the of size the reduce or expand to be and structure the influence can be can size Party scale”) of economy (“the administration of (Panebianco 1988,188). decrease the permits it threshold certain reaching after time, same the at and hypertrophy”) (“bureaucratic expansion administrative

However, the interviews with the EPP representatives revealed that this argument is not valid, since suspension since suspension valid, not is that argument this representativesrevealed the EPP with the interviews However, an important character of the organization per se. Panebianco claims that leade that claims Panebianco se. per organization the of character important lsion from the EPP does not necessarily imply suspension/exclusion from EPP’s party group in the EP. in group the party fromEPP’s suspension/exclusion imply does notnecessarily EPP from the lsion hn explaining when - making

( the factor that is argued is cructhe factor that tobe suspension or expulsion) when any conflict within the partythe arises within any whenconflict expulsion) or suspension ould , be directl be

also treated as a dependent variable. Size is on the one hand the factor that that factor the hand one the on is Size variable. dependent a as treated also p ry structure arty other technical factors technical other why EPP did not suspend Fidesz from its structures: it would lose would it structures: its from Fidesz suspend not did EPP why

y influenced. This influenced. y

functioning of the organization, the of functioning 3

n pry finance. party and are studied are a Europarty ial for this analysis,this scrutinized. for needs ial be to

19 the of one was s; more members→ more diversity→ more more diversity→ more members→ more s; and their influence their and

in this project this in

may be reluctant to apply to reluctant be may

eoe ht the that, Before

iffere most common arguments common most , such as number of number as such , but on the other hand, it can it hand, other the on but on nt, most often connected to connected often most nt,

Europarties’ relationship Europarties’ - all party” strategy, strategy, party” all literature on party party on literature strong strong , since the size of size the since , disciplinary rs often try try often rs p arty staff arty

in the in

a ,

CEU eTD Collection example, for Beyme, ( party the of style S 50& Hix 1997, Lord Source: Figure 1. Europarties. the on is two extreme right socialist) 1 spirituelles”: 1985). Beyme (von them calls Beyme different represent Europarties The everal authors claim that claim authors everal - dimensional space, as presented by Hix and Lord (1997). In this analysis, the main focus main the analysis, this In (1997). Lord and Hix by presented as space, dimensional 2.1.2. ,

Positions of thePositions p of 4 left )

, and , and einl n ethnic and regional Impact of - ih dimension right ) iea ad aia, 2 radical, and liberal 9 von Beyme 1985; Hix & Lord 1997; Enyedi 1997; Lord & Hix 1985; Beyme von ) ecological rus that argues

I deology on deology on ideology is a is ideology arty families .

The The since it represents represents it since ,

5 ate o te et eg Sca Dmcas ae more are Democrats) Social (e.g. Left the of parties ) F at families party P igure 1 1 igure agrarian

arty ) factor that can shape the organizational structure organizational the shape can that factor

codn t te uhr tee r nine are there author, the to According

conservative S 20 shows shows tructure ,

6 )

hita democratic Christian or or the position the ,

fmle spirituelles” “familles 3 ) basic distinction among different different among distinction basic workers’ (social democratic and and democratic (social workers’

of main party families mainpartyof & Linek 2008). Klaus von von Klaus 2008). Linek & ,

7 ) ,

communist as Klaus von von Klaus as “f amilles

in the in the

, and

CEU eTD Collection Bolleyer Building parties. of structure organizational shape can ideology that fact the acknowledge they common, so not is organization party Line and Enyedi Although (Enyedibecausesimilar originsLinek are & their 2008 other each resemble may family ideological one of members and dependency gr social versa) vice (and organization party covariation ideol of impact causal direct Führerprinzip citizens” among cooperation and organization organization organization: party Linek & Enyedi of ideology party onthestyleof organization is power and hierarchical) (i.e. “ideolo that finds Bolleyer who Christian Democrats (e.g. Right the of parties the to compared when programmes their in consistent

on affiliat hea more rely and organization party complex more developed have conservatism of type corporatist and collectivist more a to subscribing parties while embeddedness, indivi in ‘party the and leadership individualized more structure, simpler a members, staff fewer Centre -

public oup n ot and ulsi ielge ten ideologies dualistic may be be may fr example for , - right

that and so on) (Enyedi & Linek 2008, 457). 2008, Linek & (Enyedi on) so and - e organizations office’ tends also to have a more elevated role. Parties that have more more have that Parties role. elevated more a have to also tends office’

es I hers, r cniee t b centre be to considered are identify three main reasons for correlation between ideology and type of of type and ideology between correlation for reasons main three identify parties, as opposed to leftist parties, tend to be less bureaucratized, have bureaucratized, less be to tend parties, leftist to opposed as parties, at represents). party “spurious” is, t First, argue gy can account for the basic choice between a power a between choice basic the for account can gy cnld ta drc cua rltosi bten dooy and ideology between relationship causal direct that conclude k - here when dispersing party structure” (Bolleyer 2012, 317). The influence influence The 317). 2012, (Bolleyer structure” party dispersing

and g o pry raiain r nt ueos Scn, t Second, numerous. not are organization party on ogy (Enyedi455). Linek & 2008,

that ideology shapes the organizational structure of the the of structure organizational the shapes ideology that

may be be may , but , there is no direct causal relationship between ideology and and ideologybetween relationship causal direct no is there the

d hr, c Third, lo o ae lgtr ognzto ad weaker and organization ‘lighter’ have to also both “ide drc cua ipc o ielg o party on ideology of impact causal direct a ology of party explicitly addresses issues of of issues addresses explicitly party of ology variables 21 orrelation orrelation

ih pris (o Bye 95. Similarly, 1985). Beyme (von parties) right (e.g. belief in direct democracy, collectivism, democracy, direct in belief (e.g. summarized byLinek:& Enyedi on the argumentation of of argumentation the on

, 458 are influenced by influenced are However, they add that examples of of examples that add they However, a b a be may ).

eut f itrcl path historical of result the the nei Linek & Enyedi third factor (e.g. factor third - ,

concentrating concentrating

for example for vily vily the the he - , ,

CEU eTD Collection between theorganization, ofthe thesize within Marchand party rules argue et al. that o the within behavior actual vice and down also authors The 9). 2000, al et. (March and boundaries and identities organizational of behavior 5) the 2000, al et. regulate(March them” among interaction that and individuals expectations and regulations, norms, implicit or explicit study. measures disciplinary potential and members of obligations Europarties of rules formal above, outlined As towards influence newly of identity measures. rules Europ the between differences ideological internal their in written is what apply strictly they whether Europ f raiain ahrne o hs rules those to adherence organization, of epe r nt once t oe nte, r f once, hy o o share not do they connected, if or often another, more perhaps (and created frequently more be will They understandings. informal one to experience, connected understanding, not are people value and informal these complexity, unnecess rules explicit make that beliefs and values shared through controlled and coordinated be isargued, it can, world simple Asmall, homogeneous, relationships andunderstandings. lead will both or complexity or size organizational either in increases that hypothesized commonly is It arties The main reason for analysis of formal rules is that r that is rules formal of analysis for reason main The 2.1.3. external actors. external actors. s

It is argued that argued is It lo t also and influence and

Formal ary and even wasteful. As organization grows in scale, diversity and and diversity scale, in grows organization As wasteful. even and ary - versa, rules that are written may sometimes be very loosely connected to to connected loosely very be sometimes may written are that rules versa, he way how Europarties manage their boundaries and define their identity identity their define and boundaries their manage Europarties how way he - omd organiza formed R

o nrae s fwitnrls wih r lentvs o informal to alternatives are which rules, written of use increased to

ules and and ules s

ideology how organizations work, what kind of rules parties have and also, and have parties rules of kind what work, organizations how rganization

O r enn. y hs nlss rls r sbttts for substitutes are rules analysis, this By meaning. or in, s aeino rus Pnbac 18, 3, but 53), 1988, (Panebianco argues Panebianco as tions, does does rgan claim that important rules are not necessarily written written necessarily not are rules important that claim

izations not only only not Mrh t a 2000). al et. (March arties arties - based mechanisms become less feasible. Relevant feasible. less become mechanisms based 22

– may account for the differences in the formal the in differences the for account may stabilize linkage with other organizations” organizations” other with linkage stabilize n apiain of application and

play the requirements for the entry to the party the to entry the for requirements the

a crucial r crucial ules in organizations in ules rules and regulations and rules –

are at the main focus of this this of focus main the at are Considering ole in determining collective determining in ole

but moreover, they “define “define they moreover, but n tp of type any h relationship the disciplinary . Thus, t Thus, . “consist of “consist

he ,

CEU eTD Collection &Hoyland Hix national from the 4 several introduced, are? Europarties inclusive or proj this of question research the reader, the remind To further research. project determinet factors what and so behave they why arises, conflict a such when behave they how conflict, the of analysis divert parties member the Enyedi Mansfeldov party. European the of position the with conflict of form some in is which step work no almost know s of amount when especially organization, the within Internalrules only not

cholars have analyzed the party group cohesion and party discipline within the EP. We also We EP. the within discipline party and cohesion group party the analyzed have cholars For example, For 2.2. uoen party European

subject to revision) as organization becomes more heterogeneous (March et 62) (March heterogeneous more becomes organization as revision) to subject a

bout the “ the bout is o il the fill to aims touches touches

Concept .

work about the ideological disputes inside the European the inside disputes ideological the about work he response from both si both from response he a Hix &Hoyland Hix , 2011, 2011,

“ party party relationship between the two actors, why they sometimes are in are sometimes they why actors, two the between relationship The Europ The

upon the problem of of problem the upon posi a adopts party member national a when cases the about agents ual ual 55)

and and . He He . concepts need to be defined: what is meant by “selective” and “inclusive” and “selective” by meant is what defined: be to need concepts

F define identity and boundaries of the organization, but also organization, but of boundaries the and identity define another another from the established norms (Eny norms established the from

ramework a n h xsigltrtr n hs poietefrt tp for step first the provide thus, and literature existing the in gap

with the two princip two the with

rus ht E that argues argue that MEP arguethat ean Union and Party Politics in Politics Party and Union ean from the Euro from the

Thus,

des, is des, the the ’ before uroparties uroparties sar pean party group, which may sometimes contradict each othereach contradict maywhichsometimes group, party pean 2006 possible possible e under the constant tension between two principles principles two between tension constant the under e still missing. By adBymissing. still a ofitn stain emerges. situation conflicting al 23 h aayi o idpnet variables independent of analysis the s problem” s ok dtd by edited book

r al “o nlc dmg” when damage” inflict “to able are conflict between conflict uoat or Europarty

ect is ect edi 2006, 78). 2006, edi Central and Central 4 . However, there is no theory no is there However, : d What determines how selective how determines What ressing all these problems, th problems, these all ressing even even al . Le G. Paul

P the national national the arliament and arliament

against against Eastern Europe Eastern However, the the However, i ad Zdenka and wis hr i a is There h ideological the tion or takes a takes or tion an member regulate life regulate life

ideological

numerous al -

national national

” broader . one a be can

, 2000, 2000, Zsolt Zsolt great and and and the the is

CEU eTD Collection Source: compiled by the author by compiled Source: li 5 Indicators: 1. Categories Indicators Dimension 1.OperationalizationTable “selective/inclusive” of is measured Europarty aspects: In toidentify order how selectiveEuroparties orinclusive the are,toanalyze need we three Opera where leaves off” (Panebianco it 1988,56). defining or selectivity inclusivity to refers Europarties of maintenance boundary study, this of context the In boundary of conceptualization the to proceed me let chapter, this of part first in stan “Europarties” term the what and

terature directly directly terature These three dimensions were created for the purpose of this analysis, since there are no similar concepts in the the in concepts similar no are sincethere analysis,ofthis thefor purpose werecreated dimensions three These

Application Application t ionalization of the of ionalization term selecti 1)

where the boundaries of Europarties Europarties of boundaries the where

and of Europarties in terms of their members. interms of their Europarties members. of how easy/hard enter isto how a Europarty

- medium - - Req. Entry

low high by

3) 3) connected to theof Europarties study to connected Application

three dimensions

(correspond how easy/hard is to be excluded fromexcluded how easy/hard a be isto p

- - - vot of Strength low high medium

ing

- - viduals indi to Open to no yes

(see 1): Table

interview

ds for. ds

ve/inclusive - - shi member Exclusive Members no yes p

questions about applicants)questions Since the definition of definition the Since . 24

application, membership and control. membershipapplication, and are, we can also identify also can we are, -

2) how hip

- - members of Obligations a financial

dditional

Borrowing

easy/hard it to remain a remain easy/hard itto member arty. Hence,arty.

- - mance perfor member of review Official

Panebianco’s wordsPanebianco’s again no yes

Europarties was provided provided was Europarties -

selectivity/inclusivity

“where it starts and and starts it “where - - - measures plinary disci of Categories 7 3 2 1, Control

maintenance.

- - - voting of Strength

low high medium

, by

CEU eTD Collection obligations. financial only fulfill officially requirements obligations Member indicates inEuroparty that membership exclusive. isnot Exclusivity membership of Europarty, members: individual the to Open Indicators: 2 account.into commonly, Most being is thedecision orthe by thecouncil made Congress. allow that applicants beapproved by must three Medium Strength ofvoting and/or respect sta not or statutes to attached directly (either principles of declaration of form some to subscribe must party applicant above, described requirements to addition in that indicate requirements be to commonly most criteria additional fulfill must party applicant the rules, statutes/internal and programme “low”). as labeled party the of regulations internal and/or statutes accept and Europarty the of programme political the to subscribe must parties applicant that Three Europarty. the to accepted requirements: Entry . Membership comparability, the

corresponds absolute majority/superqualified to majorityand no no

indicates that individual members the individual Europarty.indicates join cannot that (correspon nding orders of orders nding Europarty. :

Here, Here,

Medium

: the type of requirements that applicant party has to fulfill in o in fulfill to has party applicant that requirements of type the

Financial Financial a differencesamong are party that the organs takenottaken decisions l ow : ibe oiia fo political viable

d Yes

ing

indicates entry requirements indicate that in addition to acceptance of of acceptance to addition in that indicate requirements entry

indicates indicates to - scale typology is applied. is typology scale en ta mme pris ut n diin o entry to addition in must parties member that means interview

Yes that applicant partiesby are approved majorityvote. -

that member parties cannot join other Europarty, cannot join parties that member quarters of allocated votes or by consensus. ofallocated by quarters votes or indicates that individual members can join the the join can members individual that indicates

questions about members)questions 25 c a te ainlrgoa level. national/regional the at rce

cmo fo (common

Addit Low Low al hren uoate, thus Europarties, thirteen all r ional ional entry requirements indicate indicate requirements entry high indicates that member member that indicates

strength High rder to be be to rder indicates To

entry entry

no – )

CEU eTD Collection three consensus. by approved be must applicants that indicates Medium voting: of Strength how many rules post a ofex Europartyapply.can levels different Europarty that measures measures disciplinary of Categories membership per member of review Official Indicators: 3. “maintain regularcontacts have parties

Control

orsod t aslt m absolute to corresponds

Again, differencesare among party organs nottaken account. into (correspond status te obligations other exists, L ow ing recognizes in its statutes/internal regulations. statutes/internal its in recognizes

no ”

to disciplinary measures questions) questions) to disciplinary measures , etc. indicates

indicates that officially, there review isno process.

formance

s el sc a rpr o ter oetc eeomn or development domestic their on report as such well, as

that applicant parties are approved by majority vote. vote. majority by approved are parties applicant that :

ajority/superqualified majority and and majority ajority/superqualified rsns the presents :

Yes 26 indicates that some form of official review of review official of form some that indicates

ubr f aeois f disciplinary of categories of number - ures f loae vts r by or votes allocated of quarters

The number indicates indicates number The

high

strength

CEU eTD Collection party. concrete the of development Europarties all of (becauseit not is therefore and parliament European the in sitting not is when cases be might there Eu of independently exist parties European Transnational same. the not are two those since parties, European transnational remind E EAF, EFA, EDP, EL, AECR, Party, built variable f The awithin Europarty. control and membership application, dimensions: three on measured is variable dependent difference? that for account factors what yes, if and are? Europarties Union). Civic SMER party level European The 3.

3.1. R

an irst part of part irst the dataset of the the of dataset the ESEARCH

alytical part of the the of part alytical 3.1.1.

Methods and Data Methodsand that I keep the distinction between the European Parliament’s party groups and and groups party Parliament’s European the between distinction the keep I that –

s party members were not elected). Since Since elected). werenot partymembers s boundary maintenance of Europarties. In order to do so, I collected the data and and data the collected I so, do to order In Europarties. of maintenance boundary -

SD SD The main research question is: is: question research main The Analysis of of Analysis and

the project the In other words, is there a difference in how Europarties treat their members members their treat Europarties how in difference a there is words, other In D (Direction te ie eid s not is period time the , ESIGN

) ae td o two of study case 2) all existing existing all

paper paper D the AND - consist ocuments and oil Democracy) Social

national party is a member of transnational European party but party European transnational of member a is party national M consist ropean party groups within the European parliament. Thus, Thus, parliament. European the within groups party ropean s ETHODOLOGY

of the of uoen parties European o eape we te aa n h pry fin party the on data the when example, For UD, ECPM, AENM, MELD). Here, it is important to important is it Here, MELD). AENM, ECPM, UD, s

of 1) of C pcfe or specified analys C entral 27 ontent What determines how selective or inclusive the inclusive or selective how determines What

the the

and is of the factors which influence which factors the of is European

analysis of the of analysis this researchaims this As presen As A conservative conservative

nalysis EP PS ALDE PES, (EPP, iie ad ifr acrig o the to according differs and limited

a parties:

ted in the previous chapter, the the chapter, previous the in ted member of of member party organizations at the at organizations party at Fidesz party Slovak Slovak

to analyzestate currentto the , European Green Green European , social EP party group party EP ,

(Hun dependent - democrat ne are ance garian

CEU eTD Collection party. member national ofE behavior different of explanation a 6 concluded be can it and small quite is measures disciplinary some took parties European where parties national of number The Parliament ( t from finance. obtained party 4) and structure) (party party the within making a as (party party the of structure about: collected are data the and parts main four into divided is analysis this to importance EU organization governing a as (party parties “ test and case) the is it (if praxis the and rules the between difference the identify to able be will language and rules the of analysis content the from obtained be will information the all thus, fo (1992) Mair’s & Katz adopt I analyzed. be will influence that factors Several 2004. 2004 of period the for presented

cet, nt cet, “ accept”, “not accept”, However, when it comes to the case whenthe to comes it However, governing organization“ governing sne the since )

whether hypothesized factors really play really factors hypothesized whether

. At the At .

regulations of Europarties, when those statutes are available online and in English in and online available are statutes those when Europarties, of regulations the data on parties e web he later stage of the research by the help of semi of help the by research the of stage later

’ European party groups within the European parliament European withinthe party groups European

party power

- uih o not. or punish” ae o Europarties of pages 6 . Hence, the analysis of party organizations at the European level European the at organizations party of analysis the Hence, .

finance).

the - - study analysis, one of the arguments suggests that the “party as the that suggests arguments ofthe one analysis, study eain wti te Euro the within relations PP and PES when and deal PES PP - 2013, this means that Europarty was officially was Europarty that means this 2013, dependent variable ( variable dependent membership organization), 2) the 2) organization), membership

ht n kn o dsilnr maue s rather is measure disciplinary of kind any that : political parties are not those who “govern” in the in “govern” who those not are parties political : do te nlss f h gvrig tts f the of status governing the of analysis the drop I 28 a

crucial role in leaders’ decisio leaders’ in role crucial and cus on the “official story” of the parties and and parties the of story” “official the on cus ing with conflicts between the E the withbetween conflicts ing

how selective/inclusive Europarties are Europarties selective/inclusive how rm h web the from pean parliament are of secondary secondary of are parliament pean -

structured elite interviews, I interviews, elite structured 1) the the 1)

l ifrain il be will information All - may play a may play party sta party ae f the of page size and membership membership and size s tatutes and tatutes uroparty and and uroparty

ff, 3) decision 3) ff, crucial role in the role crucial

ns whether to whether ns recognized in recognized European European i nternal the ) -

CEU eTD Collection European of Party “disobedient” and Party) People’s European& Socialists (former parties European between relationship the of understanding a Europe is project the of part second The parties of member accordance with the that mean necessarily not does however, This, “candidates”possible disciplinary for measures: were and media) mass the in (identified “salient” were cases other Several status party member from Party) Workers' Democratic Social (Latvian LSDSP of Downgrade 5. 4. Green suspendedBulgaria; (2010) from Party, EPP 3. MDF, exclusi withinitiated from Hungary; (10.9.2009) the EPP suspended 2. SMER LegaItaly;1. North,Free from suspended EuropeanAliance (1994) and one other disciplinarymeasure: there far, So rule. the than exception nd

  

the to anobserver party(29.09. 2012) , Fidesz, (2012) Hungary; from EPP Serbia;DSS, from EPP UDF,Bulgaria; (2007)from EPP 3.1.2. both members of transnational European parties: European transnational of members both - ugra pry iez in Fidesz party Hungarian SD, Slovakia; SD, (2006)suspended from the PES

Case studies

the proclaimed principlesproclaimed European of theissmall. parties

the

have been been have case study of two political parties political two of study case 2012.

29 Th four cases of sus of cases four

cs suis aim studies case e

national member parties (SMER parties member national the Slovak party SMER party Slovak pension of the member party member the of pension

to provide a deeper deeper a provide to from from

not on Central

osdrd as considered

behaving - SD in SD - Eastern Eastern 2006 - SD SD in in

CEU eTD Collection calls phone through times multiple contacted were Socialists European of Party the from repres Several politicians. the of views and experience personal with etc) statutes, semi t addition In Parliament). European the at and Headquarters EPP the (at Belgium Brussels, in 2013 April in conducted long, minutes 40 approximately were interviews The representatives. PES and EPP the with articles, design. systems different most different so nor similar, so neither are that reminded be should It cases”. “boundary its treats Europarty separately cases these of understanding statu membership SMER suspended t different with however, region. the in topics salient relatively both Moreover, were/are cases both that also and phenomenon accessibility, sel case the behind rationale The treatmentFidesz. and for SMER of & Fidesz) the - structured European People’s Partyand European People’s 3.1.3. journal articles, articles, journal from both perspectives. I hypothesize that Ithat hypothesize perspectives. both from o the data obtained from the documents and web and documents the from obtained data the o

the

The use of interview useof The data ihr at ofcas rm h PS ertra, or Secretariat, PES the from officials Party either pa lt itriw ae odce t cnrn te fiil tr (rte rules, (written story official the confront to conducted are interviews elite possibility to use native language and thus better understand and explain explain and understand better thus and language native use to possibility s) rties , hra EP i nt pl ay icpiay measures disciplinary any apply not did EPP whereas oad Fidesz. towards

are similar (two (two similar are fiil statements, official etet rm h Europarty the from reatment

h mi sucs o te analysis the for sources main The

cin f ugra ad lvk ate ae geographical are parties Slovak and Hungarian of ection the The , since they represent the illustrative example of how a how of example illustrative the represent they since , Party of European Socialists account for ofEuropeanthe account Party Socialists as big parties in the government from the same region), same the from government the in parties big

to qualify for the most similar systems design or or design systems similar most the for qualify to rmr am s o rvd te xlnto and explanation the provide to is aim primary 30 press

eess n semi and releases the Tu, am o nlz wy PES why analyze to aim I Thus, . differencein - pages of the European parties, parties, European the of pages Slovak and Hungarian case Hungarian and Slovak p f w cases two of ltcas MP o the of (MEPs oliticians the - structured interviews interviews structured ideological positionideological

emails and/or and/or emails (change of of (change ir are

entatives different different online the

CEU eTD Collection structure” internal different sister a is PES it of but parties, members of group parliamentary the is Parliament European the in Group party that specified reply another Later, successor. elected been has he that was office Schulz’s Martin from reply The email. via questions the answer to agreed time of lack the for Poland) from Presidency the of member (a Liberadzki Bohuslaw Mr. includes: PE the of Members Group, S&D the to belonging Parliament European            

, I should contact should I Zitathe Presidency, Woman Member Gurmai, PES of Mojca Kleva, thePresidency, of Member Slovenia SD Katarína Neved'alová BoguslawLiberadzki, Member ofthe Pre Sylvanaof Greece thePresidency, Member Rapti, PASOK Germany Pres the of Member Schulz, Martin Sophocles Sophocleous, Member ofthe Cyprus Presidency, MEDEK Kristian Vigenin, MemberBS ofthe Presidency, and Congress President's the to Adviser Deasy, Hannah Yonnec First Polet, Sergei President PES Stanishev, Progressive and AllianceSocialists Democrats theEP in of Hannes of Swoboda,Presidency, Chairman Member thePES oftheof the Group

h Peiet f h Erpa Primn ad hs I hud otc his contact should I thus, and Parliament European the of President the

the the Party of European Socialists instead of instead Socialists European of Party D , Member of the Presidency, SMER Slovakia SMER ofthe, Member Presidency, eputy SecretaryGeneral

i dency, President of the European Parliament, SPD Parliament, European the of President dency, s 31 eeking information on the processes within the within processes the on information eeking

(email communication, 2013). 2013). communication, (email

sidency, SLDsidency, Poland

Office, political coordination of Presidency of coordination political Office,

P BulgariaP

the the

S&D Group S&D S Presidency). The list Presidency).The S

However . “ . The S The

, Mr. , &D

CEU eTD Collection the Unfortunately, Vlase, conversation. (Delia email Office, procedures” Chairman's of EPP rules the Party of People’s Spokeswoman European the to attached much y that subjects “the since EPP the of representatives the contact reply S&D the of Chairman’s the to similar very was EP in Group EPP the of Chairman the from reply The includes: Similarly,representa the wasPES conducted.approached people Other that been have Nev Katarina Ms. with interview the Successfully, topic. the about knowledge most the have they since parties”, “specific contact to was advice Kleva’s Socialist European of Party the to the as that replied Group S&D the of Chairman currennt the Swodoba, Hannes           

Anna Zaborska,Anna NatiSlovak Head of LopezAntonio LucSecretaryVandeputte,Deputy General, EPP Nicolasof Briec,EPP External Relations, Secretary membership issues Corien Wortmann Martens,Wilfried President EPP Edit Bauer, Jacek Saryusz Melanie Dursin, Adviser tothe Political Assembly Political Kremer,Christian DeputySecretary General, EPP Daul, ChairmanJoseph Group ofEPP inEP

i aed i fly akd u ee i i ws o, h sgeto ws to was suggestion the not, was it if even but packed fully is agenda his MEP Slovakia MEP - Wolski - Isturiz, EPP SecretaryIsturiz, Spain EPP MEP General, tives of theEuropean P People’s tives - Kool, , Vice President of the EPP, MEP Poland , ViceMEP President ofthe EPP, Vice Chairman oftheon EPP, President WG3 ofthe

s h E eduressol ecnatd s Mojca Ms. contacted. be should Headquarters PES the ,

onal Delegation of EPP Grouponal of Delegation inEP EPP 32

arty The were list contacted.

did not reply did not edalova, Vice President of the the of President Vice edalova, ou are referring to are very very are to referring are ou

research

refers

CEU eTD Collection and Kremer) Christian were that people have Other conducted. approached been Briec Nicolas (Mr. representatives EPP the with interviews two Nevertheless, interview. the issues membership on WG3 the of Chairperson

33 -

Corien Wortman Corien

- Kool was not available for available not was did not reply did not .

CEU eTD Collection EFA EDP EL AECR EGP ALDE PES EPP Europart 2.Boundary maintenanceTable Europarties of the control over the members. represents dimension third the and party the within remain to is it hard or easy how measures dimension fisrt dimensions: three the by measured maintenance, the presents 2 Table The 4.

4.1. T

HE y

Three Dimensionsof Three M Boundary

D ATAON country onepartygreen Exclusiverepresenta Union; European the outside from within Parties par European statutes member respectingparties Socialist International Non EU/EFTAmembers; for states/applicants memberEU in parties International Socialist members) for EU, applicants EFTA ( Europeanparties Geographic restriction? Applicants/ political party political by represented may Nation/region be parties; European parties European partie European Union European the from ofParties countries EU memberEU states, measures how easy or hard it is to enter the Europarty. The second dimension dimension second The Europarty. the enter to is it hard or easy how measures

UROPARTY

ties ;

onlyone s

in a in

and tion tion

detailed

O and movements and greenGreen parties, organizations democraticreformist and ideals Parties defendingliberal, organizations and democratic and progressive parties social socialist, like other Democrat, Christian and Centrist Scope/Identity* statutes the programme in as described to the whichsubscribe political ofFederation parties political the in t values and Members that progressivealternative and Left Democratic ofparties the sovereignty respectfor national parliamentary democracy and subsidiarity,limited government, personalfreedom, markets,to open Euro RGANIZ

data on thirteen Europarties and their boundary boundary their and Europarties thirteen on data - realist subscribe that parties pref

- ace mindedparties 34 he he indicated principles ATIONS

aintenance to statutes to share the common sharethe

democratic, labour

Application, Membership and Control. The Control. and Membership Application,

E MPIRICAL

EntryRequirements Internal Order; Internal and the Statutes Accept Rules the of programme; EFAAccept the political N/A accepts statutes and political the programme(manifesto) aimsAgreewith the of principles and of Declarationprinciples the Prague the Acceptsubscribe to statutes, EGP BookandAccept Rule of Statutes progressive; democraticecological, social, and Promote which Greenpolitics are Declaration Stuttgart programmesthe and Internal Regulations,the the policy AcceptAssociation,of statutes the standing orders if Acceptapplicable,and statutes associated members); fulland parliamentary for (applicable terms in representation one twoof the or European National parliamentary association the by of Adoption Political force;politicalViable - laws and internalregulations ofand laws

A NALYSIS

programme and

CEU eTD Collection EGP ALDE PES EPP Europarty 2.Boundary maintenanceTable Europarties (cont.) of MELD AENM ECPM EUD EAF

President) (castingvote of the members the present majorityAbsolute of Membership; EPP Group Workingon advic the Assembly Political on voting Decision the Allocated the Votes majority quarters of Committee)three by by proposal the a(upon Council Approvedby the meeting)of the chairmanvote ofthe votes cast the (casting majoritybysimple of Bureau Individuals: cast; votesof thirds the majoritybyof two Council membership: and affilia Full majority Presidencysimple by observer: Individual majority, superqualified Congressby International parties: Socialist non majority; qualified par International Socialist ties: Congressby

deleg EFA, the forming a single memberconsentof the becomemembera geographicalmayarea partyfromsame the politically (Another active Not defined Not the orjoin apply EU not) to (regardlesswhetherthey of parties European politicians parties; European parties European parties European

- eof makerand ation)

with the with Observer Associate, Full, Observer Association/Individual, Member Ordinary,Associate, Membershipstatus CategoryMembership Associate, Special Candidate, Full, Individual Affiliate, Full,

Europe complete ofbureaucratization effort an statesimpede in to the among cooperation sovereign Democracy, and Freedom the Committed of principles to sameof the sensitivity and Patriotic movementsnational organizations Christian racistprinciples to democratic subscribe non and pan spectrum Members widefrompolitical a - EuropeanEurorelists who

demo

cratic parties and cratic and parties Exclusive defined Not defined Not defined Not exclusive”) (“strictly Yes ** membership

- Subscribes t Subscribes regulations association ofthe the Political Program,and Statutes the oftoDeclaration th adhesion (ArticleStatutes) of the 3 the Endorse basicprogramme statutes in objectives to the downSubscribe laid EAF statutes in objectives to the downSubscribe laid information internal bulletin) (atleastIssuepublications an local and/or regionalassemblies; state and/or and/or or national Have members elected ofEuropean nation; their Politicallyactive o party;politicalBestructured Obligations of and policy and partyreportingon membership yearsEvery two obligations; Financial obligations Financial Financial obligations Financial obligations members ***

o the programmeo

n the territory the ofn

Disc. categories Numberof measures

2 7 2 2

CEU eTD Collection O betweendifferentiates parties” (EPP) Party People’s European The Source: MELD AENM ECPM EUD EAF EFA EDP EL AECR rdinary members rdinary

4.2.

compiled by the author by compiled 4.2.1.

What influences boundary maintenance?What influences Saue o te P, 01 ad hs om te igs Europarty. biggest the forms thus and 2011) EPP, the of (Statutes Board membersits by Board majority of membersits by Board majority of fullmembers majorityvote of the GeneralAssembly by majority Co consensus) specified not of(basis Chairpersons; of Council votescast oftwo by Council majority Not d Not Bureau uncil byuncil two

Party Size and Membership S Party SizeMembership and efined

thirds ofthe thirds

(currently 43 (currently

- four thirds thirds

types of membership: of types Not defined Not Associate,Observer members, Full bodies/friends Associated members, Full defined Not defined Not members Honorary Individual, Observer Full, persons phy associated,observer, members, individual Partymembers, Individual organizations, parties/political Observer rights, withfull organizations parties/political Member Observer Associate, Full, sical persons, legal sical persons, ) have full rights in all EPP organs and come from come and organs EPP all in rights full have

unites

tructure “Christian Democrat, Centrist and like and Centrist Democrat, “Christian

Not defined Not N/A EL of principles the aims the and contrary not is to ifacting No, their Yes defined Not defined Not defined Not defined Not defined Not ordinary

, associate , with the otherwith the solidaritypolitical Demonstrate secretariat; publication party Forwardthe Financial obligations members; other with contacts the regular Maintain N/A Financial obligations Financial obligations Book) (Article Rule 4, develop Not defined Not Financial obligation paycontribution) fromto obligation exemption partial or may (board grantfull Financial obligations Financial obligations Financial obligations members; ,

observer

ments

to the tothe

and individual and

h EPP The countr - minded N/A 2 1 2 3 2 2 1 1

ies .

CEU eTD Collection are that applicants the democrati International Socialist the of members also are members sam the less or more conditions the with members Similarly, etc. homepage, (EPP 2013). EPP When Membership on Group Working be respectto commitment adopts Presidency. EPP the to request the procedure The may and tojoin attend invited meetings theEPP and members. be donothaveof therights Support member. individual an as MEP other any accept officio”.Also, “memberex or become he/she party,member EPP’s grouof list a on elected is Parliament EPP the of member a When members. supporting and members may Europe o of become Council the of members are that countries from EPP the to close Parties or structure policies, EU to connected decisions in participate not do they exception: obvious one with members full as rights similar with members associate usually Union. European the in based a PES PES “viable political fo group in the Parliament as well as in the Committee of the Regions, Council of Europe of Council Regions, the of Committee the in as well as Parliament the in group the the c, socialist and labour parties” (Socialist International (Socialist parties” labour and socialist c, bserver members members bserver also party is accepted as a member of member a as accepted is party the oiia porme by programme, political Party of European Socialists European of Party

from application to application from recognizes n on Socialist on rce” in its respective country. The application is then transmittedcountry. is totherce” application respective The inits the values and principles of EPP. Moreover, EPP. of principles andvalues the

without without the Parties from EU candidate states and/or EFTA members are members EFTA and/or states candidate EU from Parties possib

International members International , Political Assembly (on the proposal of EPP Presidency) can EPP of proposalAssemblyPolitical the (on hc sns eomnain t te oiia Assembly. Political the to recommendations sends which

acceptance has several steps: First, First, steps: several has acceptance h rqet hud nld te ttmn that statement the include should request The oig ihs I adto, P rcgie individual recognizes EPP addition, In rights. voting ility to become become to ility - laws and internal regulations of of regulations internal and laws

(PES) the 37

EPP, its elected representatives must join the join must representatives elected its EPP,

consists of consists

a i cs o EPP. of case in as e . a ing members, persons or associations or persons members, ing PES Presidency examines Presidency PES –

ul ebr at for party member full “ worldwide organ worldwide 53

homepage full, associate and observer observer and associate full, the s

an individual member, individual an applicant party should applicant the the institutional setting. institutional in p

, 2013). , ot f h PES the of Most party has to send to has party the is ation of social social of ation h European the P and EPP

applicants However, However, European the party

CEU eTD Collection recognize that Alliance) representati Free European the being other (the Europarties two within of Book. Rule the in specified criteria Europe t to close are that those are parties Associate total) membership” category “special and members associate members, candidate The (Statutes ofALDE 2004). Party, Bureau the to application votes whether examines take and membership for then requirements Council The Council. the to application Application of parties European other as consists non Belgian the to membership The 2012).Statutes, and majority superqualified (PES a majority simple by upon of decided are membership basis observer individual for applications the on upon voted are members International on upon voted are membership on the a European Green Party Green European

. Geographically, full members and candidate members are parties from within Europe. within from parties are members candidate and members full Geographically, . Alliance ae y ae bas case by case at Idvda mmes pl truh h Secretary the through apply members Individual cast. EGP group in the EP the in group EGP as well as from as well as

but not European, European, not but on o

o membership for

f ieas n Dmcas o Europe for Democrats and Liberals of f one party Green per outside E outside i ad h dcso i md b te oges Al plctos for applications All Congress. the by made is decision the and s which , and any other green movements green other any and

(EGP) .

Thus, the EGP the Thus, has to be sent to the Bureau that consequently submits the the submits consequently that Bureau the to sent be to has urope

rft soito Erpa Lbrl ot, otherwise Youth, Liberal European association profit

hn eie wt te ipe aoiy f h vts cast votes the of majority simple the with decides then recognizes four categori four recognizes Special category membership is reserved for the members the for reserved is membership category Special h bss f qaiid aoiy ol non only majority, qualified a of basis the country

(EGP Statutes, 2011) Statutes, (EGP s

affiliate its final decision with a majority of two thirds of the of thirds two of majority a with decision final its

38 he European Green family, “closely related” to related” “closely family, Green European he (Article 6, Rule Book 6,Rule EGP). of(Article the is the only Europarty that accepts parties from parties accepts that Europarty only the is fl ad niiul members individual and full ,

and . Moreov . es of membership: full members, full membership: of es (ALDE) organizations which meet the the meet which organizations - General er, the EGP is one of the of one is EGP the er,

rns uoai full automatic grants the the who , at mes the meets party

(30 members in in members (30

5 i total) in (55

umt the submits

exclusive Socialist Socialist it .

CEU eTD Collection 3, approach and applicants toits base, membership the increase to order in words, other In manipulated by the than members inclusive and open with parties that is assumption the obvious: extent what to and Europarti of maintenance boundary is analysis this for important is What found in d space, out “ unites that Left European numbers and parties member f The member partyInternal 2010). isneeded (EFA Rules of Order, politic one that say explicitly party the of rules Statutory obser parties. regional small are them of most however, 40), (approx. parties (EFA) Alliance Free European The

h sals Erpris ae lo h lws ety requirements entry lowest the also have Europarties smallest the s h biggest the as ver and individual category of membership, the EFA recognizes “honorary members”. “honorary recognizes EFA the membership, of category individual and ver ive ousted. By controlling organization’s boundaries, the leaders can make it grow or or grow it n make can does leaders who the shrink boundaries, enters, organization’s who controlling decide By ousted. leaders The selective). or ability a [of membership party] tochange size recruitment (be bywith tamping it etailed

Table A see uoate dsrbd bv ae h bget uoate i trs f ubr of number of terms in Europarties biggest the are above described Europarties al party” and in special cases of applicants from the same region, region, same the from applicants of cases special in and party” al

(Panebianco 190) 1988, al A Table pa

data on the size of size the on data 3. rties that that rties

party

leaders’ a also also Europarty 1

n pedx A Appendix in ( in terms of of terms in ttt o te at o te uoen et 2010) Left, European the of Party the of Statute are more selective. more are d

emocratic parties of the alternative and progressive left” left” progressive and alternative the of parties emocratic

lowercriteria the entry.for the is selective all s and es .

s h fut bget uoat i trs f t member its of terms in Europarty biggest fourth the is number of MEPs in the European Parliament (for exact (for Parliament European the in MEPs of number the thirteen Europarties and their member parties can be be can parties member their and Europarties thirteen ). answer , From in particular, how party size influences whether whether influences size party how particular, in

or 39 a Party size is thus seen as a variable that can be can that variable a as seen thus is size Party nation or region “ region or nation

inclusive. to the

the question the te egt uoate, h Pry of Party the Europarties, eight other

h opst relationship opposite The As can be seen from Table As canbe 2 and seen a

at my apply may party entry requirements entry

how party size relates to the to relates size party how may be represented by only only by represented be may t ad h i t be to is who and ot,

In addition to addition In (EAF, EUD, ECPM, ECPM, EUD, (EAF, the consent of the of consent the Fo . r the lack of of lack the r an have more more have inclusive inclusive the may be be may

stands stands open full,

CEU eTD Collection s than selective more is representedcountries by one only are have not does PES the Although dimension). (third control and dimension) (second membership EAF, after that means also requirement this part addition, In EGP). the member for restriction geographical (no countries attract to need they base, membership their increase to want the 4 Table individual increases, parties member of number the as Moreover, find may parties bigger increases, he the as Hence, 187). 1988, (Panebianco organizations” small in attain to easier [… values political “shared since cohesion, internal its decrease may party a of size in ( party the party’s Nevertheless, are th (MELD). Statutes short very either have them of some Moreover, developed MELD) and AENM ocial democratic party party democratic ocial number of member parties per country or region to one. one. to region or country per parties member of number the the e results strategy ofleaders’ emembers. toattract more new applicants are not are applicants new internal cohesion, participation/mobilization cohesion, internal

represents provision that says one member party per country, the reality shows that most of the the of most that shows reality the country, per party member one says that provision Therefore we cannot conclude (but also not refute) that their low entry requirementsentry low their refute)that not also (but conclude cannot we Therefore a Panebianco 1988, 186) 1988, Panebianco member party n em of terms in certain threshold certain as presented in chapter in presented as an .

additional aspect of party size. Statutes of the EGP and the EFA limit limit EFA the and EGP the of Statutes size. party of aspect additional t oee, h sals Erpris r also are Europarties smallest the However,

he EPP. It may well be the case that there exists only one successful successful one only exists there that case the be well may It EPP. he at national level. national at ’s performance’s hi structure their

– a

if relevant category relevant ,

and thus also how also thus and for instance for the

party (see (see party

two coherent identity of the organization the of identity coherent , may be

Nevertheless, c Nevertheless, rbby eas te ae eaiey e parties new relatively are they because probably , the size of a of size the 40 , all European countries are represented in the in represented are countries European all , come

Table A Table any

of members and bureaucratization within bureaucratization and members of

a harder more more party manages its boundaries. Increase boundaries. its manages party 3 omparing all thirteen Europarties thirteen all omparing ). That party can influence influence can party

(e.g. ECPM) ECPM) (e.g.

h cnrl vr ah n every and each over control the

and as well Thus, if the EGP and the EFA the and EGP the if Thus,

Europarties Europarties is not to suggest that the PES PES thatthe tosuggest is not .

the r o ttts t all at Statutes no or ones that are least least are that ones

harder to sustain. to harder need to focus on on focus to need three aspects: aspects: three ies from new new from ies terogeneity ] , the ,

are a .

CEU eTD Collection the of 223). (Panebianco1988, proportion “the the as for measured responsible Europarties, bureaucrats the of component” “administrative the at looks study This bureaucracy. party the to staff party the of size the relates literature Party EPP Europarty 4 Table national member per parties one country st EPP

p arty’s ands out not only as the biggest party but also as the party with the with party the as also but party biggest the as only not out ands 4.2.2. . Membership structure country: PES by EPP and compared

Slovenia Slovakia Romania Portugal Poland Netherlands Malta Luxembourg Lithuania Latvia Italy Ireland Hungary Greece Germany France Finland Estonia Denmark Republic Czech Cyprus Bulgaria Belgium Austria Total Sweden Spain MemberC h

eadquarter Party S

ountry

taff

(

he h S the

number of party ofstaff number 47 2 2 3 3 3 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 2 1 2 1 1 1 2 2 1 5 2 1 member N

o. o o. e

cretariat) aneac o te raiain o oa membership” total to organization the of maintenance f full f p.

, followed by, followed theALDE

codn t te information the to according 41 PES Europarty

expresses the expresses

Ireland Hungary Greece Germany France Finland Est Denmark Republic Czech Cyprus Croatia Bulgaria Belgium Austria Total Kingdom United Sweden Spain Slovenia Slovakia Romania Portugal Poland Norway Netherlands Malta Luxembourg Lithuania Italy MemberCountry onia

(see

number of people working at workingpeopleat of number

again again

band from obtained highest Table A 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 member N 32 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1

o. o.

of full of number of of number 3). p.

the

CEU eTD Collection

Europ of pages web Source: calculated. is not ratio the members, individual of mainly composed Note: 8 n one takes members,study this party ofindividual number 7 on advisor or Affairs” Institutional and “Democracy for advisor find can we PES, the for party’s about us tell can role Simi issues. membership on group working EPP’s of Relations External of Secretary a is whom among people, employs28 EPP the illustration, the For members. its treats Europartyhow reveal can role their employeesand parties, national numerous unites that Europarties to However, 233). 1988, (Panebianco bureaucrats by than rather leaders party by P MELD AE ECPM EUD EAF EFA EDP EL AECR E ALDE PES EPP 5 Table employs“bureaucrat” one parties member of number the to compared employees party table parties member of number total to employees party of proportion the on information part the of websites

“bureaucrat” as an employee of a party, not professional politician or expert. expert. or politician party,a ofnot professional as anemployee “bureaucrat” the ofparty to staff by proportion measured the usually is party the of component administrative Although GP a nebianco

NM European Party European

Staff ratio ratio Staff

it can be seen that the European Democratic Party (EDP) has the highest number of of number highest the has (EDP) Party Democratic European the that seen be can it . Party staff andParty ratio of staff staff acknowledges the fact that in reality, political parties are controlled and managed and controlled are parties political reality, in that fact the acknowledges -

proportion of staff to the number of member parties (full, associated, observer). If a party is party a If observer). associated, (full, parties member of number the to staff of proportion

number of employees was available. was employees of number ies. ies. arties

8 Number of memberparties Numberof h tbe 5 table The , 2013 2013 ,

for every two parties political

10 18 12 36 10 27 15 30 55 53 73 - -

preferences. For example, among the people that work that people the among example, For preferences.

Europarties presents the results for all Europarties where the the where Europarties all for results the presents 42 .

ational member party as the basic unitanalysis. of basic as the memberparty ational

larly, the allocation of people and their their and people of allocation the larly,

h informatio the In Number addition N/A N/A N/A N/A 12 12 25 28 6 3 1 1 2 floe b te E that PES the by followed ,

of staff of

was computed was , s , taff ratio measur ratio taff on n

who is coordinator is who number of of number when it comes comes it when Staff ratio Staff 7 1:1.6 1:2.5 1:4.5 1:2.1 1:2.6 1:18 1:18 N/A N/A N/A N/A . From . 1:5 -

ing ing

party

the the the

CEU eTD Collection “Assembly”(AENM) 10 2004/2003) No (EC) Regulation (Article 4, programme their aspolitical well as management” financial 9 Congress. the of those ( representatives” national Council” “the above, outlined As caseenlarged meeting is“the oft decision The manifesto. party a adopts as well as Presidency EC the to candidates common mee that Congress” Election “the also recognizes parties. member from delegates/representatives of number greatest the the as serves Congress nine Europarties, thirteen of Out (Delwit statutes). et al.2004;party the Council, the Congress, the organs: party same the nearly no are statutes party MELD, the E since exist, they availa statutes their have Europarties all Not regulations. decision of rules formal The commonly boundary of dimensions maintenance three the to connected are that technicalities all for responsible monitoring and studies “country

According to Article 4, Europarties have to submit a statute defining bodies “responsible for political and and political for “responsible bodies defining statute a submit to have Europarties Article 4, to According

U. Alternatively, 9

All thirteen Europart thirteen All 4.2.3. - making organ of the European Green Party is the Council and the Congress in this in Congress the and Council the is Party Green European the of organ making financial

the “Political Assembly” (EP Assembly” “Political the - Party

plcto o nw ebr, oto o mmesi rqieet (most requirements membership of control members, new of application for qualify to order in requirement necessary a are they

oblig S tructure: Most of the Europa the of Most highest decision highest

ations) andof applicationdisciplinaryations) measures. Delwit et al. 2004, 11) with meetings being held more often than often more held being meetings with 11) 2004, al. et Delwit of case in although organs, internal their define extent some to ies - making within within making

D he Council” (EGP Statutes, 2011). Statutes, he Council” (EGP ”. t available online available t ecision

10 at saue rcgie te C “the recognize statutes party u ms ipraty amnsrtv ogn ae usually are organs administrative importantly, most But

P), the “General Assembly” (EFA, ECPM), the ECPM), (EFA, Assembly” the “General P), s nte pry ra ta sre a “ as serves that organ party another is - making body (supreme organ) of a party and unites and party a of organ) (supreme body making - making rties have also a party organ that brings together together brings that organ party a also have rties a 43 party

ts before the European elections and elects elects and elections European the before ts

are defined in party’s s party’s in defined are (see Table A4). Table (see it h in the in ble online but the assumption is that is assumption the but online ble Presidency and the Secretariat the and Presidency P arty

ongress”. Generally, the the Generally, ongress”. The biggest parties have have parties biggest The

The PES, for instance, instance, for PES, The

tatutes funding from the the from funding assemb and internal internal and

highest l [y]

CEU eTD Collection 11 for fees membership as such sources additional on rely to have parties 2004/2003). No (EC) distribute is 85% remaining and shares” equal in distributed be “shall budget the of 15% Regulation, EU. the of budget general the from financed are Europarties 2004, Since forEGP with, instanc specif that document long pages 63 exception: another is Book Rule EGP The Statutes). EGP 8, (Article procedure” this of outcome the by bound be matter operational other or Book Rule “assist shall Panel Conciliationthe Statutes, EGP the to According parties. member the between disputes settling Panel. Conciliation the and Board Advisory Finance the Committee, the Congress, the Council, the recognizes EGP the Similarly, Secretariat. the and conference Leader’s the Presidency, the Council, the Congress, Elect the Congress, the three): number usual to (compared organs party six recognizes str party elaborated more with The theresponsibilities, frequency analyzed compositionis and inTable ofmeetingsA4. their staff). party on section the in (described represente are Europarties (EFA Bureau” “the (AECR), Directors” of Board “the partyleaders

For example the EPP on their webpage claims that the EU funding accounts for exactly 75% of party budget. ofparty budget. 75% exactly for accounts funding EU the webpage that claims their on example the EPP For party funding was approximately was funding party Part 4.2.4. y of European Socialists and the and Socialists European of y d among parties that have elected MEPs elected have that parties among d

–

PartyF usually called the Presidency (EPP, PES), “the Council of Chairpersons” (EL), Chairpersons”of Council “the PES), Presidency(EPP, the called usually in settlingin disputes e, provisions onmembership evaluatione, provisions andreview T inance he EU funding EU he

b te em f emnn pry employees party permanent of team the by d Thus, t Thus,

ucture as compared to other Europarties. The PES PES The Europarties. other to compared as ucture he EGP is the only Europarty that that Europarty only the is EGP he [… 18.9 million euro million 18.9 s.” Moreover, “all persons and bodies of the EGP shall EGP the of bodies and persons “all Moreover, s.” shall not exceed 75% of the party’s budget and thus, thus, and budget party’s the of 75% exceed not shall ]

The detailed description of all party organs, their their organs, party all of description detailed The relating to the interpretation of these Statutes or the or these interpretationofStatutes the to relating European Green Party stand out as out stand Party Green European 44

proportionally to their number (Regulation number their to proportionally

AEMN , (EPP homepage, 2013) homepage, (EPP ies

rules and procedures within the the within procedures and rules ) . etc. On a daily basis, the the basis, daily a On etc. 11

In has has . 2012, 2012,

a According to the the to According special organ for for organ special -

h Secretariat the the EU the the

and in 2013, in and Europarty officially

b udget

ion

CEU eTD Collection mil. euro. with0.3 the and EUD MELD 12 though even when small is excluded cases or suspended of number The party. the of exclusion or suspension incentive less is there party, European the of when hence, and party European Coh P. Anthony in exist only parties European the of boundaries that fact is shifting and crossing boundary thus, and boundaries symbolic paper This (Lamo hosts” and newcomers between negotiations to central are shifting and blurring, crossing, “boundary that argue who authors several of work the to refer liter the to results expected the Connecting and everyEuroparty decision finance, party staff, party th of structure organizational the influences maintenance boundary influences this consequently, and Thi see euro million 2.2 with ALDE the and euro million 5 with PES the by followed euro, million 7.3 approximately 2012. in funds all of 57% than more received together PES the (see increased been has number this

The ALDE is then followed by the EGP theby EGP followed ALDE is then The s paper argues that the the that argues paper s 4.3. Table A Table

0.8 mil euro, the EDP themil EDP euro, 0.8

T he 6 argue ) R .

ole of ole . n 18) rus. hs eut in results This argues). (1985) en 12 s

(For detailed information on party funding during the period 2004 period the during funding party on information detailed (For

ht Euro that treats its members and its it whether treats P arty

– change in independent variables is influenced by the the by influenced variablesis independent in change

0.6 mil. euro, the EFA, the EAF and the AENM the EAF and mil. the the EFA, 0.6 euro, I

deology en ate cn e hrceie a cmuiis ae on based communities as characterized be can parties pean a - making within the party) and thus also the fact the also thus and party) the within making – national member party divert party member national

1.6 mil. euro, the AECRmil. the 1.6 euro, Table Table : D ature on boundary on ature iscussion A6). A6). e Europarties Europarties e 45 the

to apply strong disciplinary measures such measures disciplinary strong apply to

The two biggest Europarties Europarties biggest two The number of cases when we can speak about about speak can we when cases of number

applies es tit dooia psto o the of position ideological strict less

of Europarties. Europarties. of – (

1.4 mil. euro, the mil. euro, 1.4 the the - the

maintenance, maintenance, disciplinary measuresdisciplinary ornot. size of size id of minds

s This year This easier, possibly also for the the for also possibly easier,

from the ideals/goals/aims the from nt & Molnar 2002, 185). 185). 2002, Molnar & nt –

0.4 mil. euro mil. 0.4

the party organization, party the a I argue that ideology that argue I EL EL national party was was party national , their Lamont & Molnar Molnar Lamont& the EPP receive EPP the –

0.9 mil. the 0.9 euro, – party ,

ebr (as members and the ECPM the and ECPM the EPP and EPP the

how ideology - 2013, each each

as as d

CEU eTD Collection Categories Indicators Dimension 3 Table document. “ideologica several include more are Statutes PES the organization, EPP the of identity the the to reference substantial without of “technical” Statutes while that shows statutes party the of analysis qualitative not may it Although different. is categories those between “distance” the and same the not are requirements entry the for category high low the among example) (for differences qualitative The measures. disciplinary of t addition, in and measures disciplinary the to comes it when voting of strength high party), of development the on years two every report (membership applicants on voting Party Green European the is out stands that left are requirements entry highest the with parties diff T the at look we When adherence totheir own support again which rule, rather are measures disciplinary Thus, higher. is conflict of form some rne aog pa among erences . Boundary maintenance Europarties of

Req. Entry - - - low medium high Application

, financial but also other additional obligations for member parties parties member for obligations additional other also but financial , - - - voting of Strength rties low high medium internalregulations. rules and

able able

the on t te xlnto ta te are they that explanation the to point l” provisions with the declaration of principles included in the the in included principles of declaration the with provisions l”

hypothesis that Europarties that hypothesis with three dimensions of boundary maintenance, we see that see we maintenance, boundary of dimensions three with - - viduals indi to Open no yes

- - ship membe Exclusive Membership no yes

that has high entry requirements, requirements, entry high has that 46 r

be visible from sole looking at the table, table, the at looking sole from visible be

- - - members of Obligations

additional financial summary

ig parties wing

are less strict when it comes to the the to comes it when strict less are

he highest number of categories of number highest he

- - mance perfor member of review Official

no yes

PS EGP) (PES,

dooial rooted. ideologically

the the - - - measures plinary disci of Categories 7 3 2 1, Control excep

high strength of of strength high Te example The . -

tion than the than tion

medium - - - voting of Strength low high medi

Both Both

CEU eTD Collection centre to compared organizations, Europartiesmore that like “convoy” operates organizations. “club” are EGP the and PES the that conclude selec more are organizations club versa, vice and criteria entry low with organizations sense this in are organizations Convoy useful. analyzingWhen boundary Europarties, themaintenance can “convoy”/”club” of distinction be they“admit more outl the of consequence a As inclusive than“clubs”, natureconvoy heterogeneous since they more of organizations, be may 2). 2010, (Kelley requirements entry high use participate words, other to in states regional all “allow “ that rules “club” Kelley and unconditionally” to according which rules “convoy” rules: membership of types two apply can organizations regional that argues Kelley Judith i P Notes: the author by compiled Source: MELD AENM ECPM EUD EAF EFA EDP EL AECR EGP ALDE PES EPP Europarty nformation not available not specified or not available nformation

–

parties; I I parties;

low low low low low high ? low medium high medium high medium

–

individuals; W individuals; I: low I: medium P: medium N/A N/A N/A low low low medium high medium high low I: medium P: ier states”ier (Kelley 2010,8).

- N/A N/A yes yes yes yes yes yes yes no yes yes yes

withdrawal of voting rights; S/E S/E rights; voting of withdrawal

enforce strict admission and participation criteria” or or criteria” participation and admission strict enforce N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A ? no yes N/A N/A N/A yes

ie Acrig o h Tbe ad , e may we 3, and 2 Table the to According tive.

N/A financial financial financial financial additional financial ? financial financial additional financial financial financial financial

Suspension/exclusion; N/A Suspension/exclusion; N/A no no no no no no no no yes no no no

N/A 2 2 1 1 2 1 2 3 7 2 2 2

N/A N/A N/A low low medium medium high low S/E: high medium W: m m medium edium edium -

right

CEU eTD Collection me chapter, next in follows Nevedalova Katarina Ms. with interview the to According they since req measures these usually apply to hard is it that adds also Kelley However, exclusion. monitoring),or their g.through (e.members 7). 2010, (Kelley membership” full to stations “halfway as seen not are membership of stages different where organizations a “as membership of of levels different levels different of use clu that argues the Kelley 7). 2010, (Kelley membership also but conditionality), membership (or requirements tool ante ex of example The apply. can a “ex between differentiate also author The mbership status, but also applies ex post tools to tools mbership alsopost but “socialize” appliesmembers. status, ex disobedient ie “ uire ih ee o agreement of level high

the Party of European Socialists not only uses different levels of of levels different uses only not Socialists European of Party the Ex post tools according to the author include socialization of socialization include author the to according tools post Ex tool of influence” which may not be the case of convoy convoy of case the be not may which influence” of tool

that regulate membership is different level of entry of level different is membership regulate that nte tools” and “ex pos “ex and tools” nte

use of “drasticmeasures” of use 48 ihn h ognzto” Kle 21, 12). 2010, (Kelley organization” the within

b organizations “are more likely” to use to likely” more “are organizations b

and the case study of SMER that SMER of study case the and t” tools that organizations that tools t”

such as suspension and suspension as such

CEU eTD Collection 13 Berlin Eu tolerant and pluralist modern, a “ForDeclaration PES the to refers 2006) 12, (October Brussels in Presidency PES the by adopted resolution official The RobertMinister Fico toamend promised thecontroversialLaw. Media SME party Slovak the later years two However, 2006). Nicholson in Rasmussen (Poul unacceptable” is right extreme the with coalition a “forming because decision” historic this of “proud was he that said Rasmussen Nyrup Poul Chairman “far be to believed was which (SNP), PartyNational Slovak the with government a form to decision its for (PES) SMER Slovak the 2006, In representatives andthe PES EPP. of boththe the inco were they how as well as parties member of nature the and EPP the and PES the of origins the on look closer a have to need first we case, specific analyzing before since themselves the of perception party’s the and itself case the parties, member the party, the of founding the parts: four into divided their treat perception Party People’s European how illustrate that cases two of analysis the on t Europarties, of structure organizational the of analysis the After 5

. On the date

C 5.1. 5.1. rporated into their respe their into rporated w cases two ASESTUDY 13

when reasonsfor suspension. According explainingthe declaration, SMER’s the to Party of Party European Socialists and January 31, 2012 31, January -

MR n Fds i lrey ae o te lt itriw wt the with interviews elite the on based largely is Fidesz and SMER - ih xnpoi, ainls pry (Eurac party” nationalist xenophobic, right

case. Every part adds to the overall understanding of the case studiescase the of understanding overall the to adds part Everycase.

Annex3 - ctive Europarties. The analysis of the of analysis The Europarties. ctive SD party was suspended from the Party of European Socialists Socialists European of Party the from suspended was party SD

Article 3.3 of PES Statutes ofPES 3.3 Article

“border line” line” “border SMER

h Pry f uoen oilss n the and Socialists European of Party the

- SD 2006 SD

R was accepted back after Prime Prime after back accepted was R member rope” adopted in May 2001 in 2001 May in adopted rope” his part of the paper focuses paper the of part his

i 20) Ta tm PES time That 2006). tiv Europarties’ perception of of perception Europarties’

parties. Each section is section Each parties.

CEU eTD Collection 14 of reputation manifest a have partners coalition new “the that saying Slovakia), Democratic ( HZDS and SNS SMER, of coalition strongly Slovak beginning criticized the from Martens Wilfried Party People’s European the of President of humanrights (Euractiv.sk,2009). EP the ofmembers of work ( Parliament European the in group Pen’s Le the enter not did Party National Slovak the that was factor important Another Roma. even Slovakia, in people of conditions social in improvements” w government the in still was it though even membership full regained SMER that added also Wiersma itself. punishment the than are boundaries the where of signal more was suspension SMER’s that highlighted an SMER show to was thing important vice while. a after Presidency PES bother to not seemed suspension of “cause” initial SMER Surprisingly, Decemberbecame in full membersPES of 2009. officially SMER Prague, in Congress the After 2009). adopted membership for (Applications that case “remain in time any at position its to review to possibility with body” monitoring declared a as “act and vigilant” Presidency The 2008. in only membership provisional its regained suspension The

author’snote - rsdn Jn aiu Wesa n h itriw o Erci.k ad ht h most the that said Euractiv.sk for interview the in Wiersma Marinus Jan president o tr p ail r tnc rjdcs n rca hatred racial tolerant Europe, and2001). prejudices ethnic or racial up stir to allianceco or other […]

MR gi “rahs E picpe a epesd in expressed as principles PES “breaches again SMER

all PES parties adhere to the following principles of good practice and invite invite and practice good of principles following the to adhere parties PES all

Ident European political families to do the same: to same: the do to families political European

f MR a pand o e esesd n ue 07 hwvr SMER however, 2007, June in reassessed be to planned was SMER of t, rdto, Sovereignty Tradition, ity, - - D a i te government the in was SD

operation at all levels with any political party which incites or attempts or incites which party political any with levels all at operation

Monika Beňová, Miloš Koterec and Vladimír Maňka in the issues issues the in MaňkaVladimír andKoterec Beňová, Miloš Monika

ith the Slovak National Party (SNP) because there were “some were there because (SNP) Party National Slovak the ith

d other parties what is not acceptable anymore. He He anymore. acceptable not is what parties other d 14 50 . oevr PS prcae te individual the appreciated PES Moreover, ).

ih N tl te er 00 n tu, the thus, and 2010 year the till SNP with

People's Party Party People's

refrain from any form of political of form any from refrain

Fr mdr, lrls and pluralist modern, a (For [their] –

Mo statutes vement for a a for vement PES former PES […]”

CEU eTD Collection parties democratic ofsocial 15 Statutes, (PES Presidency and period year five every however, Congress, the by decided are membership in PES the in membership maintenance. boundary of study the for relevant which perio prolonged this explains Nevedelova full member only in2009. of status the granted was SMER However, structure. PES the to back accepted was SMER s domestic examine to order in Slovakia to fact two organized Socialists European of Party the SMER, of suspension sensitive. very is Socialists, 2013 10, April from interview the in Nevedalova Vice The irresponsible decision this condemns strongly “EPP that said Martens suspension: the lifted PES after continued Slovakia of interests real S the in partners suitable of lack any by justified not is development This government. next the of part be to is party xenophobic extreme most Hans Parliament European the chair the colleague, his by joined also was He 2006). release, Press EPP in (Martens (SNP)” xenophobia and (HZDS), behavior autocratic (SMER), populism

Moreov

to some extent shows the nature of t of nature the shows extent some to er, Nevedalova claims that one fact that oneclaims Nevedalova er, - forming a coalition coalition forminga rsdn o te E ad mme o Soa pry MR M. Katarina Ms. SMER, party Slovak of member a and PES the of President hn xliig h SE cs, eeaoa lis ht uig the during that claims Nevedalova case, SMER the explaining When [to re [to -

Socialist International. International. Socialist

year - …” ( […]” accept S accept 02. s cneune i 20 we SE formed SMER when 2006 in consequence, a As 2012). therefore,

with the parties thatareparties the with - Gert Poettering who said that he is “ is he that said who Poettering Gert 2005. According to the PES Statutes, all applications f applications all Statutes, PES the to According 2005. oteig n P Pes ees, 06. h criticism The 2006). release, Press EPP in Poettering MER] MER] - finding mission was also organized by the worldwide organization worldwideorganization the bywas organized mission also finding provisional membership may be granted by the PES PES the by granted be may membership provisional d by the decision the by d byEuropean the Socialists.

he social democratic Europarty and thus is also is thus and Europarty democratic social he 51 ituation

lovak Parliament and it can only harm the harm only can it and Parliament lovak The

admits the PES PES the in the country. After year and a half, half, a and year After country. the in considered to be “not fully democratic” “not be to considered lvk at SE apid o the for applied SMER party Slovak - making procedure making

that for the Party of European European of Party the for that Congress meets only twice in twice only meets Congress man of EPP of man […] […]

- astonished that the that astonished finding missions finding

within the PES, PES, the within - ED group in in group ED or PES or the 15

CEU eTD Collection WWII 16 party active an missed “sorely MEPs organization at the Community& Van Hecke ( 2011,34). level” Jansen and organization loose relatively as perceived creat to motives D 2013). website EPP’s 2011; Hecke Eur of States Member g parliamentary and parties the between cooperation for body special a 1972, in and Europe in parties Democratic (EUCD) Democrats Christian of Euro the of Assembly General Parliament European the in Group The Ideology SMER: the towards interview the during mentioned were that Factors Congress 2009inPrague. in the of meeting the after only PES the the of member official For became SMER Congress. the reason, the similar by approved not still was membership its SNP, the with coalition

f ollower 5.2. 5.2. rgn o the of origins in1946 hc li get tes n dooy ol dsiln is ebr t te on of point the to members its discipline could ideology on formalised procedure exclusion 165).(von Beyme 1985, stress great laid which parties, criticism. growingrepeated for in came which parties Democrat Social rapidly the ideolo to first was Lenin which In centralism´ ´Democratic stressed. was opinions oligarchic. of variety and pluralism over more solidarity for need the and especially, bureaucratic more elimi became were structures membership indirect the As

European and PartyEuropean People’s .

of the ofthe

Connecting the findingsConnecting vonBeyme the argues totheliterature, that

New International Teams International New e a political party at the European level, particularly because because particularly level, European the at party political uoen epes Party People’s European roup roup ) omto o te coali the of Formation 1) opean Communities Communities opean

the Political Committee of Christian Democratic Parties from from Parties Democratic Christian of Committee Political the

pean Coal and Steel Community. In 1965, the 1965, In Community. Steel and Coal pean 16

that fist met in 1953, after the formal recognition of the of recognition formal the after 1953, in met fist that (Nouvelles Équipes Internationales, NEI) Internationales, Équipes (Nouvelles a created was iscussions about the direct elections to the EP enhanced EP the to elections direct the about iscussions Fidesz 2012 - 52 a st p Dwt 04 Te asn Van & Jansen The 2004; (Dewit up set was ee ad on by down laid were in ih anti with tion

and may have influenced the P the influenced have may and s n mrla raiain o Christian for organization umbrella an as

nated the Social Democrat parties parties Democrat Social the nated -

gise, was a feature of the early the of feature a was gise, eortc at and party democratic

h Crsin Democratic Christian the But only a Socialist party Socialist a only But

that was create that

European Union Union European the EUCD was EUCD the ES’s position position ES’s d afterthe d ) Party 2)

CEU eTD Collection 18 17 organizations three already “like other and Conservatives Democrats, Christian connect to aim p the People’s Democratic Christian by Swiss the and (EDU) (OVP) Party People’s Union Austrian Democratic European created: was organization another 1978, In and adherenceDemocratic toChristian tradition. (PPI) Populare H Van & (Jansen name” the reflectedin be “should organization the of character the that argued Belgianparties Democrat Italian hand, other the On Democratic”. “Christian name exclusive” and narrow “too avoid to wanted thus, and parties liberal and conservative European the formed meantime the in they although EPP, the to them invite to and parties, conservative Danish and British the with links formal establish to EPP the pressured members EUCD the of Some 40). 2011, Hecke Van & (Jansen for” is message the whom me the delivering is who idea an gives also it conveyed; be to message the only not signals name “a the because organization the of name the over controversy a was there Althoug European(Christian Democratic PartyGroup) People’s name its changed Parliament European the in Group the 1978), (Brussels, becameTindemans Leo Minister Prime Belgian and Netherlands), the and Luxembourg Italy, Ireland, France, Community European the On

1973 ofParty) People’s (Group Group Democratic from Christian 8

July 1976, the 1976, July -

Conservative Group, in 1979 renamed to European Democratic Group Democratic European to renamed 1979 in ConservativeGroup, h the founding parties agreed on the goal goal the on agreed parties founding the h Parliament ), t ), he compromise compromise he ecke 2011, 40). Inspired by several members (for example (for members several by Inspired 40). 2011, ecke

the first elected President of the Party the ofelected President first the Europe .

The German parties CDU and CSU were in favor of the openness to to openness the of favor in were CSU and CDU parties German The

was established (with the member parties from Belgium, Germany, Belgium, from parties member the (with established was were an People’s Party: Federation of Christian Democratic Parties of Parties Democratic Christian of Federation Party: People’s an

aiming to unite centre unite to aiming was rea was ched and “People’s Party” signaled both openness both signaled Party” “People’s and ched 53

creation of the European political party political European the of creation ( - Jansen & 2011).Jansen Hecke Van right parties right . Soon after the EPP the after Soon ic Party together with Dutch and Dutch with together Party ic

- : EUCD, EPP and EDU. and EPP EUCD, : minded” parties. Hence, parties. minded” ir own group own ir 17

’s first Congress first ’s to Group of the of Group to Italian Partido Partido Italian arty with the with arty ssage and and ssage

in the in -

CEU eTD Collection 2013 2, February Accessed: at: found canbe the and campaign template The EPP. Embassy Hungarian to sendan email 19 structures its from Fidesz suspend to EPP the on called also Socialists European of Party the 2012, January after Hungary in changes constitutional the Following and be should thus, suspended ore EPP the of values and rules internal the violated has Fidesz that believe they words, other In party. EPP the from Fidesz party ruling Hungarian suspend to pressure a been has there thus, and rights human democracy, liberty, as such principles fundamental EU's breaches Hungary that believe Party People’s European the of members the of Some Act. Media extre of adoption the for criticized heavily was it with case, SMER to similarly government the joined never party Hungarian Although the expense of ideological homogeneity H outside allies the for look to have Hecke Van 2011). & (Jansen Centre Social and Democratic the of Democrats Christian French Party People’s Austrian the Popular Partido Spanish identity: EPP of some of accessionThe to be“difficult andlong theorganizations politicalcentre within spectrum of allies. theref Conservative and position its strengthen to wanted however, EPP, The

ecke 2011, 50 2011, ecke Party of European Socialist also came up witha cameup also Socialist PartyofEuropean

The claim that “if the EPP was to avoid the danger of being marginalized, it would it marginalized, being of danger the avoid to was EPP the “if that claim The )

shows the nature of the EPP and the fact, that it prefers pragmatic goals at goals pragmatic prefers it that fact, the and EPP the of nature the shows However, “eliminating the anomaly of having three transnational transnational three having of anomaly the “eliminating However,

- term challenge”term (

; Portuguese Social Portuguese

’s

in their respective countries countries theirrespective in

member parties played a considerable role in defining party’s definingparty’s in roleconsiderable aplayedparties member

the traditional Christian Democratic world” ( world” Democratic Christian traditional the ven expelled from the transnationalexpelled from party.ven (centre .

Jansen Jansen - campaign “Fighting FIDESZ”: they asked PES suppo PES asked they FIDESZ”: “Fighting campaign right) http://www.pes.eu/en/my 54 Democratic Party Democratic

; &H Van rts, aih n Nri Conservatives Nordic and Danish British,

- right” according to the authorsout according turned right” tothe and and also to the MEPs that are are that the MEPs to also ecke 2011,48 the rule of law (Mason 2012) and 2012) (Mason law of rule the ; - pes/f Italian Forza Italia and the the and Italia Forza Italian r hd o ok o the for look to had ore ighting ) it ainl party, national mist .

- . fidesz%20 That time time That membersof Jansen & Van & Jansen , rters to to rters PES ;

CEU eTD Collection da ofthe theindependence 21 20 Cooperation K again theConstitution, to amendments andwith new might theopinions have changed. poli 2012, of beginning the Since 49). 2012, (Bozóki rule” ´majority´ of version “wrecked by democracy”, replaced been has democracy liberal multiparty view his in however, of characteristics “basic few has still Hungary that argues 2012 semi illiberal “workfarist as classified be can Hungary in regime the 2010, since that argue example for Greskovitsand Bohle anymore. countrydemocratic not Hungaryis that think Severalscholars away from Transition Hungary: democra 67votes(and to e. reduce overPES slead g theEPP’ 2012). group Socialist Spiegel Parliament the in votes 14 lose would it reason: pragmatic a for Fidesz suspend to want not Hungary “accelerated opened Commission European the While necessary finds it Min Prime what so do would Hungary changed, be to have law Media the of elements some any should should group that, isconfident declaredgovernment, “EPP HungarianAct that and Parliamen European the in group democratic Hungarian EPP until the However, 2012). Euractiv.com EPP in (Cordery independence” their from “regain institutions suspended be should party Hungarian that and Secretary General

m ae cepl’ tsioy n rn o te .. omsin n euiy and Security on Commission U.S. the of front in testimony Scheppele’s Lane im Proceedings on three issues: the independence of the national central bank, the retirement age of judges and and ageofjudges the retirement bank, central national ofthe independence the issues: three onProceedings Achim Post. by wasCordery replaced Congress, PES 2012 At September 21

(Europa Press release 2012), the EPP silence s silence EPP the 2012), release Press (Europa

- n uoe rm ac 2, 03 s h lts s latest the is 2013 22, March from Europe in eorc” Bhe Gekvt 21) Bzk i hs art his in Bozóki 2011). Greskovits & (Bohle democracy” se Vko Obn rmsd o o when do to promised Orbán Viktor ister

(EPP Press(EPP release 2011). Philip ta protection authority. protection ta

Cordery

t rejected “politically motivated accusations” on the Media the on accusations” motivated “politically rejected t 20

s i ta “h slne o EP i bcmn deafening” becoming “is EPP of silence” “the that aid

cy?

infringement proceedings” against against proceedings” infringement upported speculations that EPP did EPP that speculations upported tical situation in Hungary changed Hungary in situation tical uoen omsins analysis Commission's European

ros rtcs o Hungary. of criticism erious ce rm February from icle […] ”, referring to referring ”,

CEU eTD Collection towardscurrent the Fidesz: ofthe EPP position Nicolas Briec, the a Secretaryof in External Relations example Christian be have members of EPP the from interviewees both by acknowledged t Moreover, place, name often is taken already had society criticism the with talks the important most “the to that belief his response by characterized Orbán’s Similarly, it!). to used get over, is elections debate parties, other ( example (1992 government Mečiar’s during Slovakia in situation political Hungarian attachment call to start scholars that fact The andBank electoral as Mediaelections such. Council laws and and Central of independence the rights, civil of protection the Hungary, in Court Constitutional mos the among issues, important several upon touches criticism Her 2013). (Scheppele system” Constitutional Hungarian the from powers of separation of traces last the removes Amendment’ “‘Fourth latest the that argues Scheppele HZDS (Christian Kremer 2013). imag Hung with and Hungary in escalates situation moment the at course of Well - )

the fact that is reflected is that fact the had never two never had to explain their to explain point: shares Vladimir shares Kremer n ta sm pol wud say would people some that ine s lyat the polling 2010”2012,46). in stations (Bozóki he fact that the Hungarian party Fidesz is recently at the centre of attention was was attention of centre the at recently is Fidesz party Hungarian the that fact he o h wr dmcay Bzk 21; ol & rsoic 21) resambles 2011) Greskovitch & Bohle 2012; (Bozoki democracy word the to Mečiar did not see the parties in the opposition as relevant partners for any any for partners relevant as opposition the in parties the see not did Mečiar (Deputy Secretary General) General) Secretary (Deputy n se, oh Nicolas both asked, en - thirds majority in the Parliament and was always in a coalition a in always was and Parliament the in majority thirds Mečiar’s belief in majoritari in belief Mečiar’s

in his famous statement “Je po voľbách, zvyknite si!” (The (The si!” zvyknite voľbách, po “Je statement famous his in

t s o a ata issue actual an not is it 56

e ae t have we Briec

sd h Hnain ae s n illustrative an as case Hungarian the used t important ones are the independence of of independence the are ones important t . When questions about the review process process review the about questions When . ary, between Hungary and the EU, the and Hungary between ary,

an democracy. Although democracy. an Sceay f xenl Relations) External of (Secretary interview from April 2013summarizes interview from April rve wa i u wt Fidesz with up is what review o - 1998).

eie ih ifrn negative different with regime

- u depending but

rm Mnse Orban Minister Prime Mečiar’s party party Mečiar’s

on how the the how on I could I

with

and and for for

CEU eTD Collection 2013),this”(Kremerin Commission the “clearly put itself behind EPP the arguesthat Kremer in institution only Europe country the And that line. official policy the the is “This whether principles. EU is respects implements question the Then 2013). (Briec implement” will le a is government a as Fidesz the see not does Commission. European EPP the of position the is party” “disobedient the why influences that factor important most The 1) Hungarian Fidesz party factors several interviews, the From the at up it brings “always Party) Presidency” Nevedalova, (Katarina 2013). Democratic Social Hungarian and Party Socialist PES the among antipathy” member “huge a is there Nevedalova, Katarina of view the In 2013). (Briec country” the of interest the in game “political calls Briec Nicolas what resembling thus opponents political the from comes party Hungarian of criticism the that seems it Thus happened never has this that claim by initiated clear a as Fidesz the towards position the present employees and officials party EPP’s that surprising not is It The of theEuropean position Com Fidesz. But nothappen did Briec it (Nicolas 2013). discussion serious a have will we then the principles, EU says the Commission respect doesn’t the country If Commission. European policy the is country this assess the to able whether is Europe which in is institution only the question And line. The official the is ago. This principles. years EU the respects two or year one already its events last the for only not so beginning, very the since line clear a adopted have we s hc i al t ass ti i te uoen omsin (re 21) Similarly, 2013). (Briec Commission” European the is this assess to able is which

oad te Fidesz the towards seven member parties from five different countries. different five from parties member seven - gitimate government, important is “what will be the policy that government that policy the be will “what is important government, gitimate case. According to the EPP Statutes, disciplinary measures can be also also be can measures disciplinary Statutes, EPP the to According case. can becan identified: prl bcue w Hnain ebr part member Hungarian two because partly , – m htmgt have might that

not only in case of Fidesz, but ever in EPP’s history. EPP’s in ever but Fidesz, of case in only not ission

influence

d However, Briec and Kremer and Briec However,

Since democratically elected Since the EPP’s position position EPP’s e (Hungarian ies towards

only, with –

CEU eTD Collection admits that numbers Popular Partido of example the gives he sense, this In 2013). (Briec hurry” in not are we time, take we “but membership, 2013). Briec (Nicolas day” one current that fact the emphasizes change will “It because se per important as EPP the of size overall the see Kremer Christian nor Briec Nicolas Neither 1) of another (as notautonomous described organization itis above), boundaries defined well have organizations autonomy of to institution another to reference the by position own party’s of justification The official leaders of thePES position as well. t direction the to point answers two the between similarities the EPP, the that here claimed direction wrong the in bit a t go and “might Hungary the between issues the that is fear personal his that acknowledging Panebianco’s concept of party institutionalization, particularly institutionalization, party of concept Panebianco’s T he Central and very long strongand so ais partywith that than out them kick saylet’s to easier be would it people manyfor then statements, completelyunacceptable disap almost saylet’s party which role. play doesn’t totally party the of size the say would I if honest be not certainly would I size of size do not play a role. However, the size of the Fidesz is another case. Christian Kremer Christian case. another is Fidesz the of size the However, role. a play not do If let’s say if the if say let’s If

n eain o t etra environ external its to relation in the Fidesz Eastern Europe. Sure,Eastern opinion of two of opinion

- PNTCD in Romania would do something like something do would Romania in PNTCD

a party that waite that party a ly, the EPP has around 15 or 20 pending requests for the EPP the for requests pending 20 or 15 around has EPP the ly, party officials represents the overall mood within the within mood overall the represents officials party peared from the political scenepolitical pearedthe from in pract

t h mmn” Kee 21) Atog i i not is it Although 2013). (Kremer moment” the at

–

58 but when the organization organization the when but ice, thereisarelation 2013). (Kremer there

d ten years for the acceptance, claiming that claiming acceptance, the for years ten d ment

n t te at ht m that fact the to and

to (Panebianco 1988).

standing political force in forcein political standing the the - hat this, indeed is the is indeed this, hat

org and they would make would they and depends on decisions on depends anization’ that r autonomous ore a brings us back us brings

factor that is that factor -

Briec also also Briec you know you s degree degree s

e EU he

CEU eTD Collection future, wil theEPP EPP the within position former his as well as level European 2013). (Briec everything” explain to everything, discuss Presidency” EPP the in attendance highest the with people the of “one was and work” EPP in participated actively “very who someone as seen been has he because partly EPP, the from colleagues his among especially Minister Prime Hungarian 3) RelationswithViktorOrban atEU (position level) etc.minorities, about more cares “EPP numbe ideology”: “pure are EPP the and Nevedalova’s PES the Ms. between with difference contradiction in is That 2013). (Kremer ideo because nowadays, “easier are discussions the broader, became EPP the although view, his In important. less became politics in ideology of question the 1989, since that argues Kremer 3 youare whom with ask and case Berlusconi second a as this take would countries many in opponents [… procedure 7 Article of kind some into go “would Commission European the towards position reluctant EPP’s influence hand one the on may elections European the that admits Kremer Christian 2) EuropeanElections ) Party ideology logy doesn’t play such an important role anymore and politics become more pragmatic” more become politics and anymore role important an such play doesn’t logy rs and important, strong actors, for us for actors, strong important, and rs together onEuropeantogether level?” -

and that is thebiggestand that (Nevedalova difference” 2013).

of EPP of l apply formanyFidesz. ofdisciplinary themeasures towards

potential conflicting situations conflicting potential itr Orban Viktor

Kee 21) Mroe, he Moreover, 2013). (Kremer

(Kremer 2013). (Kremer 2013). has 59 [the PES [the

vr pstv iae t uoen level European at image positive very a

]

it is about democracy, human rights, rights, human democracy, about is it , but on the other hand, in case that case in hand, other the on but , Hence, Hence,

decreases probability that in the the in that probability decreases “was his

ocuin ta the that conclusions positive “image” at at “image” positive las vial to available always

] , political ,

and

CEU eTD Collection national both addition, In other. the to day one from changed being circumstances the with the especially research The European the of position suggesting autonomousComission, isnot the EPP actor that vis the by influenced extent large to is) (and was not or measures r crucial the plays Orban Viktor with experience positive and contact personal Fidesz, the of size the Europarty, right centre biggest the for that revealed EPP the of representatives the with interviews the hand, PE the for factor important most the was itself semi The treatment. different their for account factors different that and differently members their treat Party People’s European European of Party the that showed 2012 in Fidesz party conservative Hungarian and 2006 in SMER party democratic social Slovak the of studies case two The and inclusive theEuroparties areand howthey “manage their boundaries”. th and Europarties of structure organizational influences ideology and party the within making decision finance, party structure, membership and size their on focus the with Europarties ide dimensions study this of variable The boundaries. their manage they how way the to according differ t Europarties first, follows: as concluded be can study this of findings The 6.

ologically rooted. Second, the Second, rooted. ologically C ONCLUSION

n i ws shown was it and encount ae ht ae en eetd rm ugr i vr slet n controversial and salient very is Hungary from selected been have that case

er -

ed onay aneac o Erpris a maue on measured was Europarties of maintenance boundary

ole several limitations. First of all, the topic of the research and and research the of topic the all, of First limitations. several . Moreover, the decision of the EPP to apply disciplinary disciplinary apply to EPP the of decision the Moreover, . number of professional party employees. It was argued that that argued was It employees. party professional of number that difference among the thirteen Europarties may be be may Europarties thirteen the among difference that study analyzed internal organizational structure organizational internal analyzed study - structured interviews with elites showed that the ideology the that showed elites with interviews structured 60 S to suspend the Slovak SMER. On the other the On SMER. Slovak the suspend to S

- à - vis its environment. environment. vis its erefore, also how selective how also erefore, his paper argued that the the that argued paper his

oilss n the and Socialists of thirteen thirteen of depend the

three ent - -

CEU eTD Collection 17:00 03.2012, 17. PressRelease/PDF/EN%20Statutes%20&%20Internal%20Regulations%20(November%202011).pdf 22 thirteen researchgreat the this Europarties, to a be can contribution Europarties. of analysis empirical further to variable t additional some by influenced is parties of structure organizational and ideology between relationship that argued be may it similarly, and maintenance boundary the of measurement may it addition, In time. the find not did they or Europarties, on questions the answer to competent feel not did they was study the of part problematic most The rules may be formal the of comparison the thus, and regulations and rules internal developed well yet not obliged By EPP´s of 9 Article the to according is EPP the of Assembly Political addition, web their on online available are EPP of rules internal avail not are they because either Second be reluctant them. criticize to part

Art. 9, EPP By EPP Art.9, ies are currently are ies

Inis agreat sense, this there area. further possibilityfor inthis research the deeper ly, the access to the statuses and statuses the to access the ly, to disclose its reasons [for suspension/exclusion]” [for reasons its disclose to hat has not been identified. This study has to be seen as the first step that opens door thatopens tobeas seendoor identified.thefirst been not Thisstudy step hat has meaningful - laws, available at: available laws,

ruling parties ruling be argued that concepts used in this analysis are not “the best” best” “the not are analysis this in used concepts that argued be .

http://www.32462857769.net/EPP/e able online or online able

in their respective countries and thus, political elites may elites political thus, and countries respective their in

internal regulations of the parties parties the of regulations internal collect However, I believe that by collecting data on all on data collecting by that believe I However, 61 are in Dutch or French language. French or Dutch in are

ion of the interviews with the elites the with interviews the of ion

- page, however, they are very brief. In brief. very are they however, page, 22 . - Similarly, some Europartieshave Similarly,some

field ofparty politics. is not is For example, For always easy always , accessed: accessed: , - laws “not “not laws . Either Either .

CEU eTD Collection Simon, and BjornHix, Hoyland. 2011. European Party People’s European Party People’s European Party People’s Enyedi,Linek.ZsoltLukáš“ and 2002. Del Delwit, Pascal. European 2004.“The People’s a and Party: analysis stages of LiberalBozoki, Andras from“Transition Democracy: Hungary” (2012), in Crisis Political Bohle,and Béla D. Greskovits Bolleyer,Nicole. 2012.“New inWestern Europe: Party Organization ofParty Hierarchies, Bard Bardi,Luciano. 200 Bardi,Luciano, andMair. Peter 2008.“The Parameters of theParty Systems.” Bache,Ian, Stephen George, Bulmer. and2011. Simon B IBLIOGRAPHY wit, P. i, Luciano. 1994.“TransnationalEuropeani, Party Federations, Parliamentary Party Bucharest, EPP Regulations Party inEast Structure Bruxelles andInfluence.Organization Player inthe Making and Influence In &Delwit, Külahci, P, Van(eds.) Cédric E. de Walle Mediations, 26(1 University, I stratarchiesand federations”. Democracies Organize: Change and Groups,Building andofEuroparties”, Katz the inR. and Muller SupranationalIn Dimensions” 14:147 York: University Oxford Press. New York: PalgraveMacmillan. dentity , Kulahi, E.and Van Walle,C.2004.

- 166.

- Romania.

Rommel, 293 Rommel, of the European People 2

, ,

. “Parties and theEuropean. “Parties Partyin National Systems and Union: 357 Ithaca 01.10.2011 N.Y. in Hungary:Longue TheDuree and Term Short 135 . 2012. . 2012 . 2011. . - – 2), Fall 2012 Fall 2), - 372. London:372. Sage. 155. Delwit, (eds) E.Kulahci inP. C.Walle ?' and Brussels: EPP Brussels: - . Central Europe”. Central Adaptation andChangein Party Organizations Adaptation .

2011 Brussells: Party Platform:EPP moreThe answer is Europe! S - tatutes ofthe Europeantatutes People 321. New OxfordUniversity York: Press.

5 . Party Politics - “ Political Parties intheNewEurope Political 16.

- DemocracyWelfareAuthoritarianism,and and The Political System Union ofthe European The Political Searching for the Right Organization : Ideologyfor theRightSearching : Organization and

Spring 2013,29

Editions de l’UniversitéEditions Bruxelles de Brussels:

’s Party. 62

' The European PartyThe APolitical Federations: Party Politics Party Politics

Brussells: Brussels: Brussels:

Statutory Congress17 Statutory

315 Politics inthe EuropeanPolitics Union. - 51 - 336.

and Mair P. (eds)

Annual Review 2012.Brussels:Annual Review EPP 14 Editions de l’UniversitéEditions

The Europarties ’s Party

455

- ” 477. , EssayIESfor, Cornell

and Intern and . , edited by Luther, edited by The Europarties:

18 October 2012 transformation”

How Parties How Party Poli in Western

Organisation Organisation al , 3rd ed.

de New tics

CEU eTD Collection Enyedi,ImpactZsolt. 2006.“Playing withEurope;Integration theo ofEuropean Bressanelli, “ Edoardo. 2012. von Beyme,Klaus. 1985. Sartori, Giovanni.2005. Poguntke,al. Thomas ,2007. et Panebianco, 1988. Angelo. and XueguangMarch,Schulz Zhou. G,2000. Martin James 1998.“TheMair, andFamily P. CasMudde. Partyand Study.” its Kreppel, Amie. 2002. 2010.“TheKelley, role inRegional of Judith. Rules Membership Organizations”. RichardKatz, S.and Peter Mair. 1995. RichardKatz, S.and Peter Mair 1992. (eds). ThomasJansen, and Steven Judge, D.and Earnshaw. 2003. David Simon, AbdulG.Noury Hix, & Roland.2007. Gerard Simon, and ChristopherHix, Lord. 1997.  

Hungarian Party System.” InHungarian Party System.” 754. Parliament:Ideology orPragmatism? Press ECPR and Organi CambridgeUniversity Press. Writtenin Organizationa Science DevelopmentInstitutional 2013 http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1643836 2010 Annual Meeting Paper in Party Organizations Western Democracies London: theEuropeanEvolution of People’s Party. Macmillan. Parliament. Martin´sSt. Press. Palgrave 2006,64 Macmillan Europe, Literature Europeanizati on

edited by Paul G. Lewis Zdenkaedited byand Paul G. Basingstoke: Mansfeldova. Houndmills, 1 211 Sage.

zational Adaptation.zational

Cambridge:CambridgeUniversity Press. -

229. The European Parliament and Supranational PartySystem: Supranational EuropeanA ParliamentStudyin and The Parties andPartyA Systems: Framework forAnalysis

Political Parties inWesternPolitical Democracies

Political Parties: Organization andPower Parties: Organization Political Van Hecke. 2011. National Group European and Parties Membership inthe The Europeanization of National PoliticalThe ofNational parties: Europeanization Power l Codes . Camb . Availableat:

The European Union and Party Politics in East Central Central andPartyPolitics inEast The European Union - on: on: 85. The European Parliament The European How Parties Organize: How Parties New York: Routledge . Stanford University Stanford Press: ridge: University Cambridge Press.

Political Parties inthe European Parties Union Political ” Party Organizations: AData Organizations: Handbook. Party Journal of European Public Policy 63 At Europe’s and Service: The Origins

Heidelberg: Springier. Heidelberg:

. London: Sage. Democratic inthe European Politics The DynamicsofRules: Change

Change and Adaptation in in Adaptation Change and . New Palgrave York: Annual Review of Political Political of Annual Review , Accessed: May, Accessed: 20, .

Aldershot: Gower.Aldershot: . Cambridge:

. Colchester:

n the 19 (5), 737 . New York: APSA APSA

CEU eTD Collection Internal EPP Regulations,available at: availableEuropeanStatutes, Party at: People´s Loewenthal, 1997.“The M.etbenefits Kate costs all. and ofboundarymaintenance: stress, Lichterman, 2005. P. Lamont, and Michele Virag 2002. Boundaries “TheStudySocial Science”. Molnar. Of inthe Durkheim, E. Cohen, Anthony 1985. P. Becker, P.1999. (ed.).Baubock, 1998. J. Rundell Schimmelfennig, Lewis,PaulZdenka G.and Mansfeldova (eds.).2006. Landrech, Robe Landrech,“ Robert. 2002. RichardKatz, S.and BernhardWessels (eds.). 19 Kulahci, 2012. Erol(ed.). Hanle Hanley (eds.). KlausGoetz, 2001. Hix H.and Simon  

y , David. 2008. , David Epidem religionamongculture inBritain” and Jews Divisions. Annual Review Sociology of York: Cambridge University Press.* Brookfield: Ashgate and EasternEurope Europe Central in East Macmillan. Analysis”. Parliaments, European and Integration. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Flexibility, Political Systemsand National S%20DEC%202011.pdf http://www.32462857769.net/EP Literature Boundaries/Boundary on Statutes

1965. . 2002. “Christian Democracy : . 2002. Paradoxes andofEuropeanization the iology rt. 2010. and internal regulations and

Congregations in Conflict: in Cultural Models Life. Local Religious Congregations of Frank,and Ulrich Sedelmeier(eds.). 2005.

New Jersey: University Press.* Princeton

Party Politics

Competition andCollusion Competition The Elementary forms of Religious Life. Elementary Religious The formsof

Elusive GroupsT Togetherness: Church 32, 200 Beyond the Nation State: theNation Parties intheEraofEuropeanIntegration Beyond Europeanization andNationalEuropeanization Politics The Community. Symbolic of Construction Europeanization and TowardsEuropeanization Parties: Political Framework a for Europeanization andPartyPolitics Europeanization . Ithaca,. NY: CornellUniversity Press.

- 207. . Houndmills, Basingstoke:. Houndmills, Palgrave Macmillan.

, Accessed: November 4, 2012 , Accessed: 4, November 8 389 Blurred Boundaries: Ethnicity, Migration

28 . London: Publishers. . Frank Cass -

167 403. P/Comtool6.0/ePressRelease/PDF/EN%20STATUTE

- of

195.

Europeani Europarties 64 ”. - maintenance:

New Univeristy York:Oxford Press.

Party Politics

99. Social Psychiatry andPsychiatric Social

The European Parliament, the National The European UnionandPartyPolitics zed European Politics?: Integration :

The Europeanization of Central of The Europeanization New York: Free Press.

. Colchester:Press * ECPR rying Bridge to America's 8 463

. Basingstoke:Palgrave

- London: Routledge. 481.

Citizenship

New .

CEU eTD Collection EU Democrats available Statutes, at: European Freedom Alliancefor available at: Statutes, EuropeanFree Alliance availableEuropeanStatutes, Free at: Alliance European Party available Democratic at: Statutes, Par Alliance Movements, at available ofEuropean National Alliance available ofEuropean Statutes, and Conservatives Reformists at: ed European Green Party 20 European available Statutes, at: Green Party ALDE AllianceLiberalsDemocrats of Europe and for available Statutes, Party at:European Socialist of

ty of the European Leftty EuropeanStatutes, available ofthe at:

Internal available Regulations, at: http://www.eurallfree.org/?q=node/72 http://www.e Accessed: May 18, November 4,2012 htt of left.org/nc/english/about_ http://www.european 2013 2012 Accessed: 4, November http://www.aecr.eu/sites/default/files/public/pdfs/statutes/AECR%20STATUTES.pdf %2012.11.2011%20as%20amended%20madrid%202013.pdf http://europeangreens.eu/sites/europeangreens.eu/fil 12.11.2011%20with%20updated%20GG%20Charter_0.pdf http://europeangreens.eu/sites/europeangreens.eu/files/EGP%20Statutes%20adopted% es.pdf http://www.aldeparty.eu/sites/eldr/files/imce/structure/about_us_files/eldr_internal_rul Accessed: February 2,2013 http://www.aldeparty.eu/sites/eldr/files/alde_party_association_statutes.pdf November 4,2012 http://www.pes.eu/sites/www.pes.org/files/pes_statutes_2012_en.pdf 0Regulations%20 http://www.32462857769.net/EPP/Comtool6.0/ePressRelease/PDF/EN%20Internal%2 (1).pdf http: - p://www.pde the //www.eudemocrats.org/eud/uploads/Statute%20of%20the%20EU%20Democrats

- , party

Accessed: FebruaryAccessed: 2,2013 , Accessed: November 4, 2012 , Accessed: 4, November - of - f - - R a.org/efaactive.php?id=67 - the edp.net/main/pde/en/aboutus/statutes/statutes.pdf Rules ule Book, availableat: - %20November%202011.pdf

european 2013 -

of Internalof Order

the_el/documents/detail/zurueck/documents/artikel/statute

left

el/

, Accessed: ,

65 http://www.e Accessed:November 4,2012 , available, at: Party available at: Statutes,

Accessed: November 4,2012

, Accessed: November 4,2012 May 18 : http://aemn.eu/ - es/egp%20rule%20book%20adopt f -

a.org/efaactive.php?id=12 , 201 , Accessed: 3 , accessed: May 2013

, Accessed:16, May

, Accessed:

, Accessed: , Accessed: M

, , 201 ,

, 3

- ,

CEU eTD Collection Europa Press2012. release. level Council Eur situácia Slovákov Wiersma: Euractiv.sk. ju.Available netrápi, 2009.J.M. Rómov akceptujú Euractiv.sk. Party Available 2006.Slovak PES. at: from suspended Euractiv.com. 2012. Press release.EPP Martens on 2008. Press President: release. "FicoaEPP EPP setback and 2006.for coalition Europe". Slovakia Press Release.EPP 2011. Applications for m Alliance Movements Statutes, ofEuropean available National at: European available Movementat: Political Christian Statutes, -  Lex. 2003

Accessed: lex.europa.eu/Lex and therules funding. regarding Availableat: their romov at: Accessed: http://www.euractiv.com/future http://m.euractiv.com/details.php?aid=509986 http://www.epp.eu/pressnew.asp?artid=277 prcontentid=9089&prcontentlg=en http://www.eppgroup.eu/press/showpr.asp?prcontroldoctypeid=1&prcontrolid=5058& Available at: &prcontentid=16991&prcontentlg=en http://www.eppgroup.eu/press/showpr.asp?pr the Media Act. JosephDaul GE NtEq6nr9YiWRvLd3A&sig2=RD06YCqaIBRiQbiDvhgLNQ&bvm=bv.41867550,d.b YCADA&usg=AFQjCNFCV9uV4CQm Application ed=0CEoQFjAE&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.pes.eu%2Fen%2Fsystem%2Ffiles%2F https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=5&cad=rja&v principles/ http://www.ecpm.info/en/page/9729 release_MEMO proceedingsagainst Hungary. Availableat: Online resourcesOnline

http://www.euractiv.sk/rozsirovanie/interview/jm , Accessed: - . Regulation (EC) No 2004/2003 of the Europeanand. Regulation(EC) No of the 2004/2003of Parliament netrapi of 4Novembergoverning regulationspolitical parties 2003onthe atEuropean , Accessed: May 20,2013 March February embership adopted. at: 2009.Available s_for_membership_adopted.pdf&ei=1M4PUbzNHrCM4gTs Verhofstadt calls for sanctionsVerhofstadt ‘Haider’ against Hungary - akceptuju

- 31, 2013 January 12 12 UriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2003:297:0001:0004:EN:PDF

- Hungary: Group rejects EPP acc politically motivated

17_en.htm 2, 2012 , European opens accelerated Commission infringement 2011, 19:00 2011, - ju

- MEP, ChairmanMEP, Group. ofthe Available EPP at:

013938 Slovakia:. Available at:Slovakia:. Available

, Accessed:February 2,2013 - eu/slovak

, Accesed: February, Accesed: 1,2013

, Accessed: February, Accessed: 1,2013

Accessed: November 4,2012 , Accessed: , Accessed: 66 -

- party

http://europa.eu/rapid/press , Accessed: February 1,2013

controldoctypeid=1&prcontrolid=10008

, Acessed: February 2,2013 - suspended February 2,2013 http://eur - wiersma

http://aemn.eu/statement - pes/article -

- slovakov

- . Availableat: 158775 - - - situacia usations on

, - , - of -

CEU eTD Collection International Socialist Homepage,at: Available Spiegel.'BoomingSilence': 2012. NyrupPoul TomNicholson. 2006.Euro Rasmussen in resolution,AvailablePES at: Orbán, EP Debates, Wednesday V.(2012). 18January 2012.Availableat: LaneKim “Hearing Scheppele. (2013) on“TheTrajectoryDemocracy of Membership Available inthe EPP. at: criticism ofHungaryMason, D. join laws. 2012.MEPs Available at: European 2013.Grants Parliament. Parliamentat from political theparties European to Accessed: conservatives Available at: 2012 Availab family Accessed: //EP//TEXT+CRE+20120118+ITEM http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef= at http://hungarianspectrum.wordpress.com/ on Hungary: Full InLaneMatters”Scheppele’s Kim ” the HelsinkiHea Commission Testimonyat 3, 2013 laws http://www.publicserviceeurope.com/article/1317/meps Accessed: May 2,2013 http://www.europarl.europa.eu/pdf/grants/grant_amounts_parties_25 European 2004 level - the

, Accessed: - , Accessed: , Accessed: helsinki

le at: May 20,2013 April http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/booming http://spectator.sme.sk/articles/view/24867/2/ - fail - commission 2 March - text, Hungarain at: text, Spectrum. Available , February to 2013 - - criticize 2013. Available at:2013. http://www.pes.eu/en/news/smer

, Europe's Conservatives FailHungary.Europe's Conservatives toCriticize - 2012 2 hearing , - hungary 2013 http://www.epp.eu/party.asp?z=58

on - 021+DOC+XML+V0//EN&language=EN - 67 - a hungary - http://www.socialistinternational.org/

810863.html 2013/03/19/kim

- - socialist suspendFico’s Smer party. full - text/ , Access - - suspended join - , Accessed: - lane

, Accessed: - criticism ed: February 2, 2013 ed: February - scheppeles , Accessed:February - - – silence pes

WhyHungary - March 03 - - of political March - - 2013.pdf hungary - - europe testimony 30 , 1 , - 2, , 2013 ring - -

s ,

- -

CEU eTD Collection Source: Anti regionalists Greensand Radical Liberals Centre democrats Social family Party A Table Parliament European Source: Total Non Democracy of Europe Left Green Nordic Left United European Reformists and Conservatives European Alliance Free European Greens European Europe for Democrats Liberals and Allianceof Democrats Socialistsand Allianceof Progressive Party People's European group EPparty A Table A PPENDI - - attached Europeans and extreme and Europeans

- right -

Hix, Noury &Roland, Noury Hix, left 2. Party families 1. Freedom and

X Europarties

. –

–

right their p and

, 2007 Abbrev

Europarties Greens/EFA a GUE/NGL nd

ALDE S&D ECR EFD

EPP party groups

iation

arty groups in th 2013

MEPs of No.

736 184 265 27 31 35 54 55 85

countries member of No.

10 12 15 20 27 26 9 e Parliament European

EN, EDD, IND/DEM,ER, TGI IND/DEM,ER, EDD, EN, ERA RBW, G/EFA, G, EUL, EUL/NGL LU, COM, ALDE EDL,ELDR, EPP,EPP (PES) SOC,S&D group Party

(AENM) Movements National European Allianceof (MELD) Democracy and ofLiberties Europe a for Movement Left (EL) PartyofEuropean (ECPM) Movement Political Christian European (AECR), Reformists and Allian Free European Party Green (EGP), European (EDP) Party Democratic European (ALDE), Democrats Liberals and Allianceof PartyofEuropean Party (EPP) People's European Alliance of European Conservatives Conservatives AllianceofEuropean - ED, EDA, UFE, UEN, EDG, FE EDG, UEN, EDA, UFE, ED,

Corresponding Corresponding

Socialists (PES) Socialists

ce (EFA) ce Europarty

CEU eTD Collection A Table Party of European Socialists European of Party European People's Party People's European European party European 32 full members 32 full members 47 3. All: 73 ( All:53 (PES) EPP

Europarties and theirmemberEuroparties national and parties

)

Bulgaria Bulgaria Belgium Austria Lithuania Lithuania Ita Ireland Party(MSZDP) Hungary Greece Germany France Finland Estonia Denmark Republic Czech Cyprus Croatia Bulgaria Bulgaria Centre(CDH) Belgium Austria Democrats (KD) Democrats Sweden Spain People's Slovenia (KDH) Movement (SDKÚ Slovakia (UDMR) inRomania Party(PDL) Liberal (PNŢCD);Democratic Romania Party (CDS People's Portugal Poland Netherlands Malta Luxembourg Lithuania Latvia theSouth Italy Ireland Party (KDNP) People's Hungary Greece (CSU) Bavaria Germany France Finland Estonia Denmark Party(KDU Republic Czech Cyprus (ZNS) ( Forces Democratic ofthe (DSB);Union StrongBulgaria a for (GERB);Democrats ly ly

- -

Democrats of the Left (DS); Italian Socialist Party (PSI) Party Socialist Italian Left (DS); ofthe Democrats - - The People of Freedom (PdL) ofFreedom People The

- - - -

- - - - - SDS People's Party(PP) People's

- -

– DS) Nationalist Party (PN) Nationalist Party

------Party

- Unity(V)

- Panhellenic Socialist Movement (PASOK) Movement Socialist Panhellenic Socialist Party (PS) Party Socialist

- - New Labour Party (Labour) Party Labour (EDEK) Democracy Social for Movement Platf Civic (UMP) Movement Popular a for Union

- Social Democratic Party(SDE) Democratic Social Austria(SPÖ) of Party Democratic Social - -

- - Fine Gael Fine Rally(DISY) Democratic Social Democratic Party of Finland PartyofFinland Democratic Social (UDEUR); Resunion (IRL) and Publica Patria Pro Austrian People's Part People's Austrian – Moderate Moderate Social Democratic Party(SDP) Democratic Social – - - National Coalition Party(KOK) Coalition National

Socialist Party Different (SP.a); Socialist Party (PS) Socialist (SP.a); Different Party Socialist

- - - Christian Democratic and Flemish (CD&V); Humanist Democratic Democratic Humanist (CD&V); Flemish and Democratic Christian Bulgarian Socialist Party (BSP) BulgarianSocialist Slovenian Democratic Party(SDS) Democratic Slovenian

- Slovak Democratic and Christian Union Union Christian and Democratic Slovak Hungarian Socialist Party (MSZP); Hungarian Social Democratic Democratic Social Hungarian Party(MSZP); Socialist Hungarian Citizens for European Development of Bulgaria Bulgaria of Development European for Citizens Social Democratic Party(PSD); Democratic Social

Social Democratic Party of Germany (SPD) Partyof Germany Democratic Social (S) Democrats Social

Fidesz - Christian Union (CDU) Democratic Christian ( Party People's Conservative Social Democratic Party of Lithuania(LSDP) Partyof Democratic Social ; Homeland Union Union Homeland );Democratic Party (DP);Agr Party );Democratic CSL); - Party of the Hungarian Coalition(SMK) Hungarian ofthe Party

- (N Democracy (ND) Democracy

Christian Democratic Appeal (CDA) (CDA) Appeal Democratic Christian

Christian Social People's Party (CSV) People's Social Christian

- - .

Si)

Czech Social Democratic Party(ČSSD) Democratic Social Czech

Union Democratic and Christian

- Tradition Responsibility Prosperity 09 ( 09 Prosperity Responsibility Tradition

orm (PO) orm (Family of the Irish) the Irish) (Familyof - Coalition Hungarian Civic Union Civic Hungarian ;

PP)

69 Democratic National Peasants' Party Party Peasants' National Democratic Slovenian People's Party (SLS) Party People's Slovenian

; ofCatalonia Union Democratic Full memberparties Full

; Party(M –

Polish People's Party (PSL) People's Polish

y(ÖVP)

Lithuanian Christian Democrats (TS Democrats Christian Lithuanian

; Union of the Centre (U Centre Union ofthe OD

(FG)

C arian People's Union People's arian ;

; );Ch

Social Social

Democratic Union of Hungarians ofHungarians Union Democratic

(Fidesz) Mo (SDP) ;

New Slovenia New ristian Democrats ristian ; deraterna

Christian Social Union in Social Christian

and Democratic Democratic and

- -

; Democratic Party Democratic Czechoslovak People's People's Czechoslovak

; Christian Democratic Democratic Christian Christian De Christian

)

;

TOP09 Christian Christian

(UDC) D

–

C); Union People's

Christian

(KD)

) P Centre

mocratic mocratic eople - LKD)

for -

CEU eTD Collection

Alliance of Liberals and Liberalsand of Alliance (ALDE, former ELDR) former (ALDE, European GreenParty European Democrats for Europe Europe for Democrats All: 55 All:30 (EG)

Germany Germany France Finland Estonia Republic Czech Cyprus Belgium Austria Sweden Spain Slovenia Slovakia Romania Poland Netherlands Luxembourg Lithuania of theRepublic Lithuania Italy Ireland Hungary Greece Germany Finland Estonia Denmark Cyprus Progress Stabilityand Bulgaria Belgium Austria Party(SDLP) Kingdom United Sweden Spain Slovenia Slovakia Romania Portugal Poland Norway Netherlands Moldova Malta Luxembourg Slovenia Slovenia Slovakia Romania Portugal Poland Norway Netherlands Malta Luxembourg Latvia Italy Ireland Hungary Greece Bulgaria Bulgaria - -

- - - - Federation ofGreens Federation Values Italyof ItalianRadicals;

------Democratic Convergence of Catalonia; Liberal Democratic Centre Democratic Liberal ofCatalonia; Convergence Democratic Spanish Socialist Workers' Party (PSOE) Party Workers' Socialist Spanish

Democratic Alternative Democratic PartyLabour (PL) ------

- - LatvianParty Green - -

- Democratic Alliance Democratic Ecologists Greens Ecologists Democratic Left Alliance (SLD); Labour Union (UP) Union Labour Alliance(SLD); Left Democratic The Par Democratic Greens 2004 Greens

- - - Open Flemish Liberals and Democrats; Reformist Movement Reformist Democrats; Liberals and Flemish Open - -

- - - Green Alliance Green Movement Environmental and Ecological Fáil Fianna Democrats United - Estonian Greens Estonian Greens The Party Reform Estonian Party; Centre Estonian Liberal Forum Liberal - - Centre Party; People's Party People'sParty Party; Centre Party (SAP) Democratic Social Swedish

- - - Green League Green Party People's Swedish Centre; Finnish -

Labour PartyLabour (Ap) Environmental Party The Greens The Party Environmental -

The Greens The - - -

Green, Ecolo Green,

Liberal Democracy of Slovenia; Zares ofSlovenia; Democracy Liberal ( Democrats Social Youth Party ofSlovenia Party Youth

- Freedom and Solidarity (SaS) Solidarity and Freedom Green Party Green for Movement National Freedoms; and Rights for Movement PartySocialist (PS) Democratic Party of Moldova (PDM) ofMoldova DemocraticParty

Politics Can Be Different CanBe Politics Democrats Free Allianceof National Liberal Party Liberal National Party (PSD) Democratic Social Green Party Green Direction

Green Party Green (suspended) Free Democratic Party Democratic Free Party; Venstre Liberal Social Danish Alliance '90/The Greens Alliance'90/The Labour Party; Liberal and Centre Union; Liberals' Movement of of Liberals'Movement Centre Union; and Liberal Party; Labour

- - - Greens

- - - The Greens; GreenLeft The Democracy Freedomfor and Party People's 66; Democrats Labour PartyLabour (PvdA)

Luxembourg Socialist Workers' Party (LSAP) Party Workers' Socialist Luxembourg The Greens The Party Democratic -

- Green Party Green

Labour Party (Labour); Social Democratic and Labour and Democratic Social (Labour); Party Labour

70 Social Democracy (Smer) Democracy Social

demokraci.pl

SD)

–

Liber

als

–

iberal Party ofDenmark Party iberal

CEU eTD Collection

European Democratic Party Democratic European Party of the European the of Party European Free Alliance Free European Alliance of European European of Alliance Conservatives and and Conservatives Reformists (AECR) (EFA) ( All:27 All:15 All:36 All:10 (EL) EDP

)

Left

Italy Italy Ireland France Republic Czech Cyprus Belgium Turkey Switzerland Catalonia Spain Marino San Romania Portugal Moldova Malta Luxembourg Italy Hungary Greece Germany France Finland Estonia Republic Czech Bulgaria Belarus Belgium Austria Kingdom United Slovakia Romania Poland Luxembourg Lithuania Latvia Iceland Hungary Denmark Republic Czech Belgium Party Green Scottish UK Ukraine Switzerland Sweden Spain Greece Germany Catalan Unity Land; Unser Union; Democratic Breton Nation; theCorsican Fra Finland Croatia Republic Czech Bulgaria Belgium Austria Spain Slovakia Marino San Poland nce -

- - Green Party of England and Wales; Green Party in Northern Ireland; Ireland; in Northern Party Green Wales; and ofEngland Party Green

- - - - Alliance for Italy for Alliance Party Refoundation Communist

------Initiative for Catalonia Greens Catalonia for Initiative United Left; Communist Party of S Partyof Left; Communist United Basque Nationalist Party Nationalist Basque

Democratic Alternative Democratic ------

- - For Fatherland and Freedom/LNNK Fatherlandand For

- - - - Democratic Movement Democratic Synaspismos Left Unitarian Left Party; Party; Communist French First Comes Poland Justice; Lawand Rainbow Partyof Party; Occitan Movement; Region Savoy League; Savoyan AllianceDemocrats for

- - - - - Marian Harkin, Independent MEP Independent Harkin, Marian Party European Party Solidarity and Freedom Party Independence Unity List Unity - Party Left United Estonian Communist Party of Austria of Party Communist

- - Environmental Party Th Party Environmental

List for FiumeListfor

- - Communist Party of Finland; Left Alliance Left Finland; of Party Communist Future of Åland ofFuture

- - - Green Party of Ukraine Party of Green Belarusian United Left Party "Fair World "Fair Left Party United Belarusian

Social Liberal Party; New Flemish Alliance; ProDG Alliance; Flemish New Party; Liberal Social Change for Movement Citizens' (Flanders) Party Communist Party(Wallonia); Communist Libertarian, Direct Libertarian,

- European Democratic Party Democratic European Civic Conservative Party (OKS) Conservative Civic United Macedonian Organization Ilinden Organization Macedonian United Left Bloc Left Bulgarian Party of Communists of the Republic ofMoldova Republic ofthe PartyCommunists of

Workers' Party of Hungary2006 of Party Workers' ( Bokros Lajos Romanian Communist Party Communist Romanian Party Liberal National

Bavaria Party; The Friesen; South Schleswig Voter Federation Voter Schleswig South Friesen; Party; The Bavaria Left The Anna Rosbach ( AnnaRosbach Electoral Action of Poles inLith ofPoles Action Electoral - - - -

- - Popular Alliance Alliance Popular Sammarinese Communist Refoundation Communist Sammarinese The Greens The Swiss Party of Labour Swissof Party

The Left The Alternative Democratic Reform Party Reform AlternativeDemocratic - - - -

Party of Democratic Socialism ofDemocratic Party Moravané P Change; of Path Civic Democratic Party Democratic Civic

Conservative Party; Ulster Unionist Party Unionist Ulster Party; Conservative

Independent MEP Independent Independent MEP Independent

, Democratic (LDD) Democratic ,

e Greens e arty for the Open Society the for Open arty

pain; United Alternative Left of Alternative United pain;

) uania

)

–

Pirin

CEU eTD Collection

European Alliance for for Alliance European Alliance of European European of Alliance National Movements National European Christian Christian European Political Movement Political EUDemocrats EUDemocrats Freedom ( ( AENM ECPM) (EUD) (EAF) All:12 All:10 All:18

)

United Kingdom United Ukraine Sw Serbia Romania Netherlands Lithuania Latvia Family and Environment Germany Estonia Bulgaria Belgium Belarus Armeni Sweden Drevensek Slovenia Kopecký Peter ofBratislava; P of regionalparliament Slovakia Aguiar Baltazar Madeira: of Parliament memberofthe Portugal Latvia Italy Ireland France Finland Denmark Kingdom United Sweden Malta Lithuania Hungary Germany France Belgium Austria UK Party Andalusian Solidarity; Basque Catalonia; Left of Republican Spain Slovakia Poland Netherlands Ecology LibertyParticipation Autonomy Union; Party; Slovene Italy United Kingdom Kingdom United Ukraine Sweden Spain Portugal Italy Hungary France Finland Belgium itzerland itzerland - -

- - Mebyon Kernow; Plaid Cymru; Scottish National Party National Scottish Cymru; Plaid Kernow; Mebyon

Tricolour Flame Tricolour - - – South Tyrolean Free Tyrolean South Euro Sceptic Party ( Sceptic Euro

- - -

- – – - Galician Nationalist B Nationalist Galician a

Republican Social Movement Social Republican

- - – - - – -

SharonEllul

- - Alliance of Vojvodina Romanians AllianceofVojvodina ActioPartyof Christian Democratic Union ChristianDemocratic

- -

– - - Silesian Autonomy Movement Autonomy Silesian National Front National

- - -

- - - National Platform; People's Movement People's Platform; National Arise the Republic Republic Arisethe ( Le Marine Pen -

Estonian Christian Democrats Christian Estonian

– National Democrats National Democracy Christian Belarusian List ( June

- Danne Sundman member of the Sundman Danne Party (Fi Freedom

Andreas Mölzer, Franz Obermayr ( Obermayr Franz Mölzer, Andreas

Kent Ekeroth ( Kent Ekeroth – – - All Union Democratic Christian

National Front National Democrats Christian Federal Jobbik June List (Slovenia) ( List (Slovenia) June – - Direct Democracy (Slovakia); Vladimir Kostilnik member of the Kostilnik (Slovakia); Vladimir Democracy Direct ofSlovakia ofEntrepreneurs Party Philip Claeys, Peter Kleist( Peter Claeys, Philip National Renovator Party Renovator National Bulgarian Christian Coalition; Christian Democratic Forum Democratic Christian Coalition; Christian Bulgarian ( (Portugal) NewDemocracy

Christian Democratic Union Democratic Christian

Bulgarian Union of Banat Romania Banat of Union Bulgarian

Krisztina Morvai ( KrisztinaMorvai Party of Bible Partyof

Lithuanian Christian Democrats Christian Lithuanian EU Against the Movement People’s ( Groß Torsten Rolandas Paksas, Juozas Imbrasas ( Imbrasas Juozas Paksas, Rolandas - - - -

Ukrainian Union "Svoboda" Union Ukrainian Federal Democratic Union; Evangelical People's Party People's Union; Evangelical Democratic Federal Frisian National Party National Frisian ChristianUnion

– - -

British National Party BritishNational Alliance Peoples Christian Godfrey Bloom( Godfrey Junilistan - 72 Bonici ( Bonici

n( rešov; Rudolf Kusy member of the regional parliament parliament regional memberofthe Rudolf Kusy rešov;

Sweden Democrats Sweden

Ricibas Partija Ricibas - National Front National abiding Chris abiding Euro Scettici Scettici Euro CitizensRage in dom; Liga Veneta Repubblica; Sardinian Action Sardinian Repubblica; LigaVeneta dom; nland)

(Debout la République) la (Debout

non loc; Aragonese Junta; Majorca Socialist Party; Party; Socialist Majorca Junta; Aragonese loc;

non )

Junijska lista Junijska - - partisan

partisan

UK Independence Party UKIndependence

Vlaams Belang Vlaams

Partido Da Nova Democracia Nova Da Partido tians; Centre Party; Party for Labour, Labour, for Party CentreParty; tians; – ); Normunds); Grostins )

Partito Animalista Italiano Animalista Partito Parliament of Åland of Parliament

) ) )

)

Freed

); EUD Slovenia; Gorazd Gorazd Slovenia; EUD );

Order and J and Order ; T homas Pringle, homas Pringle, Austria of Party om Nicolas Dupont Nicolas )

ustice

)

) TD

Aignan ) ) 1 1 )

)

CEU eTD Collection A Table Europ of pages web Source: Europ Movem Liberties and Democracy Liberties and EPP arty

ent for a Europe of of Europe a for ent 4. (MELD)

All:11 All:11 Structure Europarties of

Presidency Assembly Political

Organ

ean parties ean

Slovakia Poland Lithuania Italy Greece France Finland Denmark Belgium Binev bySlavi Mr. represented Bulgaria       

Lega Nord & Io amo & Io l’Italia Nord Lega

- - -

decides on the on budget decides guidelines finalpolit defines applications membership ondeciding Party ofthe positions the political defines Assembly Political t by taken decisions of implementation the ensures Assembly Political the over presides ofthe Party guidelines generalpolitical

- Popular Orthodox Rally (Λαϊκός Ορθόδοξος Συναγερμός) Ορθόδοξος (Λαϊκός Rally Orthodox Popular Movement for France (Mouvement pour la France) la (Mouvement pour France for Movement Solidarna Polska Solidarna - -

Tru

- Frank Vanhecke, independent Vanhecke, Frank Responsibility - Slovak National Party (Slovenská národná strana) národná (Slovenská Party National Slovak People for Real, Open and United Democracy (PROUD), (PROUD), Democracy United and Open Real, for People

Danish People’s Party (Dansk Folkeparti) (Dansk Party DanishPeople’s Order and Justice (Tvarka ir teisingumas) ir (Tvarka Justice and Order e Finnse (Perussuomalaiset)

ical

at least eight at annually times least four at annually times

Meetings

       Ex     

- officio members: officio Foreign and Security Security Foreignand on Representative High the Council, European the of President the Commission, the of thePresident EPP the of thePresident Regions (if they belong belong they (if Regions the of Committee the of thePresidency and theCommission EP, ofthe Presidency the members of in EP theEPP of ofthe Group parties member of delegations ofnational Presidents representatives mandated their or Associations Member Parties, Associated Member or of Ordinary Presidents theEP in ofthe EPP Group ofthe Presidency the members of Presidency the members of General theSecretary theTreasurer tenVice President(s) theHonorary in the EP Group EPP the of theChairman to affiliated (if are they theEP of Policy,the President Composition*

- Presidents

the EPP) theEPP)

CEU eTD Collection

PES

Congress Congress Council Congress Election

           

dis strategicfor platform a serves as policy PES shapingof the to contributes elections European thefor Manifesto the PES adopts Presidency Commission theEuropean to Candidate common theelects PES members exclusionof and admission the on decides PES ofthe Statutes amends and the adopts in the EP its and group the Presidency parties, to recommendations adopt President(s) the and Vice theelects President PES ofthe orientation political down the lays supremeorgan; theTreasurer a General Secretary Vice theelecting President, programmes electoral and policydocuments main the ondeciding Party the makingbodyof the decision highest cussions -

Presidents, the Presidents,

resolutions and

- 74

nd -

three years three every once isheld Congressno where years calendar those elections European ofthe ahead term) parliamentary (each period year fiveevery twice in

  members: Delegated          

member associations memberassociations memberparties, associated memberand fromEPP delegates election European last in results election the to according parties mem associated members and fromEPP Party Member Ordinary/Associate memberofan they are (if NATO OSCEand the ofEurope, Council ofthe assemblies Parliamentary in the and Regions the of Committee in the Groups EPP ofthe Presidents Party) Member an Ordinary to its group in the EP the EP itsin group ofthe representatives Congressdelegates the halfof representing memberparties, full of representatives Congress for as the same votingrights without plusdelegates Presidency PES members ofthe the memberorganization full fromother each tworepresentatives inthe EP Group ofthe delegation National each from representative a memberparties full from representatives groups and

ber ber

CEU eTD Collection

conference Leader´s Presidency Secretariat

   

running of the PES running of daily the ensures inthe Co the Presidency, the organizations, and memberparties the to recommendations and resolutions common adopt and strategy the defines Council ofthe Congressand ofdecisionsthe the implements thePES represents and leads which management thefor organ highest ngress and its group its group ngressand

calendar year calendar each in times three not lessthan necessary as oftenas daily year)a least twice (at year a times five to three

                 

organization member full other each from representative one in group th its of thePresident ofthe PES General theSecretary party member offulleach from representative one thePES theVice PES the of thePresident votingrights without plusdelegates Presidency the of the Members organization member full other each one upwards) rounded delegations, ofNational number ofthe 50% to (equal (one representative (one Team Coordination General Secretary member PES isa he/she if Regions, the of Committee Preside Vice or thePresident member PES he/sheisa if Council, European member) PES a is he/she Policy,if Security Affairsand Foreignfor Union ofthe Representative the(incl. High ofthe Commission Members PES from the tworepres member PES he/sheisa if EP, of thePresident memberparties from Leaders Party and PrimeMinisters General Secretary the and Presidents theVice thePresident, votingrights without members plus the President of the the of thePresident

representative from representative

ntthe of

President(s) of President(s)

entatives entatives

e EP e

- -

CEU eTD Collection

European European ALDE Green Party

Congress Council Bureau Council Congress

              

theCouncil meetingof anenlarged Book the and Rule Statutes the Charter, Green the changes to applications membership ondeciding de agenda political theon common decide makingbody decision highest Congress the or Council the to reserved are that those powers for except Association, ofthe objectives and purpose achieve the to useful or necessary any act undertake to power General Secretary the dismissalof and appointment Bureau, ofthe uponproposal Regulatio Internal ofthe interpretation amendments, approval, applications membership ondeciding the on budget decides elections European thefor programme political common ofthe approval Association ofthe liquidation and dissolution Association of Articles the to amendments Bureau the members of the dischargeof and dismissal election, cide on theon budget cide

a yeara least twice at year calendar ineach least once at every 5 years every5 least once at person yeara in least once at year a times least th at

ree ree

        

Bureau (delegates of of (delegates Bureau the members of inelections lastEU votes 000 everyfor 500 delegate additional one memberparty fulleach from twodelegates the Bureau members of the and representation) members(proportional fullaffiliate and General) Secretary the and Treasurer the (thePresident, organ administrative member) full fromeach criteria other and theironsize is based Full Members for ofvotes allocation Member per delegates four minimumof ofa theprinciple criteria t on is based Full Members for ofvotes allocation Member per delegates minimumoftwo ofa theprinciple years six morethan no for Treasurer a and Vice seven whomPresident, a amongst Congress, by elected the members, least nine at Youth Liberal European of delegate one ful l memberparty) l heir size and other other and heirsize

- Presidents Presidents

- -

CEU eTD Collection

AECR EL

Committee Congress Conference The Directors of Board Council AdvisoryBoard Finance Concilia Panel

- tion tion

              

vice ELelects chairperson, parties ofapplicant admission ratifies the statute the and documents basic approves term thepast of achieved aims and term givenfor Alliance objectives and aims general states the Alliance the of board theadvisory daybasis day to Alliancea on ofthe fo responsibility political externalauditor Secretary twoVice the ofthe President, Appointment/dismissal Parliament European the electionsto for ofstrategies approval interpretation their and Regulations &Internal Statutes amendments members of exclusion suspension, admission, ondeciding fees membership and theon budget decide matters operational or other Book the Rule or Statutes of the interpretation to issuesonrelating EGP bodie and/or persons Members, disputes between settling inassist Party Green European the of management financial the supervise ofthe Council ofdecisions execution the and its finances Party, Green European the of management day approves the work the approves r the administration the administration r

- to day to

chairperson(s), chairperson(s),

- - Presidents, Presidents, General and and General

softhe 77

to the the to

ofthe

means telecomm. by or person inyear per times least 6 at years calendar three every session least one at term per once yeara least twice at year per least once at

        

members of the Board, the Board, members of the membersand f persons minimumof5 byCouncil the elected persons Three persons five further Treasurer, Secretary Co Co female Council: one by elected members nine without vot without guests and observers women of 50% withleast at Congress) uponby decided key (the memberparty each of delegates (WEU) Defenc and Security European the Assemblyand ofEurope Council Regions, of Committee in group EP, ofECR Chairman members associate fromfull and delegates General Secretary and twoVice the thePresident, members: least four at (WEU) Assembly Defense and Security European the and Assembly, ofEurope Council Regions, of Committee EP, in group the ofECR Chairmen The including ull and affiliate affiliate and ull - - Chair, the Chair,the male Chair,one e Assembly e

- - Presidents Presidents Gen ingrights eral, the eral,

CEU eTD Collection

EDP

Council Congress Board Executive Chair ofCouncil -

persons

               

association the of management the and administration thefor powers members theCouncil to discharge givesthe members Council the nominates/revokes commissioners or one nominates/revokes thebudget approve applications membership theon decide modifications the on statutory decide theEDP programof political the orientationsand principle sets the Congresses the theEL between guidelines of political the determines the EL work of daily organizingthe fo responsible Chairpersons ofCouncil with the accordance in Congressand ofthe orientations and basis the ondecisions out the carries membership ELfor applications about decides theCongress and ExecutiveBoard the to passed are that recommendations resolutions and adopts issues important political on ofobjection having and rightsofinitiative EP the electionsto thefor guidelines common elaborates Board the Executive to recommendation and EL of the statements political on decides auditors Board, Executive treasurer,

a yeara at year per times least two at years everytwo year a times least four at

least once least once

            

vice and theChairperson chairperson/s Vice and Chairperson EL the memberparties, all of theChairpersons 800 of share each for party member per delegate o memberparty per twodelegates votes withadvisory guests invited other affiliate of status with the party per twodelegates t Council membersof the theEDP members of are who EP members ofthe the members) partyfor rep. 40 to member(up party per sixdelegates secretariat ofthe the Head basis) quoted Congressa the by memberparty from persons each (two Members elected thetreasurer he individual members heindividual ne supplementary nesupplementary

- 000 000 in party votes chairperson/s

t a gender t a

- -

CEU eTD Collection

Assembly General Treasur ies Secretary/ General (s) President Presidency

       

supremebody ofthe parties financing matterofthe in the norms national and communal theassociation management of daily thefor responsible party organs ofthe theby made decisions intoeffect the bring(s) and activities, the daily supervise(s) p own his maydelegate and ofthe association functioning theproper for necessary position any may create Presidency the and Council, Congress, preside(s) externally internally and both the party represent(s) theof vote to theTreasurer propose ofCouncil the vote to General(s) theSecretary propose owers

Council

a yeara least once at daily daily

              

to the Parliamentary the Parliamentary to EDP memberofthe the of nationaldelegation by representative one theVice honor of thePresident(s) thePresident(s) EDP titleofthe individual membersof who or are parties member to belong that Commission members ofthe the party affiliated per delegate one ex Presidency members ofthe the ruleas above same with the elections in the EP participated that memberparty each for delegate supplementary one elections thelastEP all the full members full theall (renewable) years twofor lasts mandate nominated; (renewable) years twofor lasts mandate nominated; (renewable) years twofor lasts mandate nominated; Council the chosenby As European of tworepresentatives General(s) theSecretary theTreasurer theat EP group

- President(s) President(s)

semblies semblies

- of

ficio

CEU eTD Collection

EFA EAF

Board Congress Secretariat Bureau

                   

appoint a Steering a appoint budget the laydown objectives mid the laydown Congress ofdecisionsthe implement the Association managethe theaudit accounts to anauditor appoint Associatio ofthe programmes thepolitical approve and determine Association the of Statute amendthe the Board members of dismiss and appoint body governing supreme public th and the press memberparties, the with relations for and meetings organizing and preparing for Presidents the and Vice President assiststhe theFederation of out decisions carries day to basis o organization ofthe activities the policyand the political defines organization the of management administrative ofthe incharge transactions judicial non and judicial all it in represents and ofthe association the business manages fi members excludes or accepts organization the for regulation aninternal canadopt theparty of programme political the establishes policy financial and the on decides nancial management nancial

- 80 nday a

political political

- -

term

Assembly General ofsessions year a outside least once at a yeara least once at years everythree least once at daily

      

the general assembly thegeneral members forming of few be times must all at member theof number association the members of fullfrom the appointed members least three at General Secretary the and Presidents tenVice President, votingrights without members observer other officers it deems officers other any and treasurer a secretary, a presidents, more viceor one memberspresident, a its fromamong (appoints theCongress by membersappointed minimumofthree Congress) next thefor everyCongress uponby decided and t by determined number (final Committee the and Steering Board members ofthe all and members, individual movements, the and memberorganizations ofthe representatives of Consists thedecides Bureau that period a for and Bureau the byChosen he Founding Congress heFounding er than the number number the than er

CEU eTD Collection

AEMN ECPM EUD

Committee Steering Assembly Bureau Assembly General Board Secretariat Board Congress

                

on two Congresses twoon the behavior between bodydeliberating the and Treasurers theelects President AEMN represents executivebody statutes inby or law theon board conferred not association in powers all the ofthe board the chairman appoints report financial issues annual association the of management thefor responsible President superv the under Association the the organsto of assistance and support decisions political of implementation budgets informationcampaign the on decides budget theannual approves Association ofthe programmes thepolitical approves and determines the Board members of and appoints Association the of the Statute amends the and Congress Board ofdecisionsthe the implements Association ofthe tasks political administ The Secretary a by headed Committee

ision of the of ision

General

81 rative and and rative dismisses dismisses

once a year a once year a once basis regular a on once a year a once least at and necessary as oftenas Congress the and Assembly from the meeting each separating periods during year asso each theof end monthsafter six ultimately definedNot ciation

                    

Vice President party/organization participating member per one Board members ofthe all capacity individual an memberson organizations/party member per representative one staff membersof least two at and ofthe Board Members least two at necessary) Chiefs of national ofnational Chiefs Bureau ofthe Members member party each of Tworepresentatives AEMN of thePresident parties associated of Representatives General Assistant Secretary The Secretary General The Treasurer The Th President The friends all and bodies associated ofthe representatives members, board association, members ofthe to open assembly by general elected the be whoto are and associate memberofan staf memberor 3. member memberof a 2. member 1. either are who individuals private least four at staff theSecretary e Vice e

- President

- party or party -

Presidents

CEU eTD Collection * only delegates with full voting rights are mentioned are rights voting full with delegates only * parties European the of Statutes Source:

Europarty A Table ALDE MELD EPP PES

. Disciplinary . Disciplinary measures      

Disciplinary Disciplinary member individual ofexpulsion members affiliate full and ofexpulsion exclusion suspension exclusion suspension measures Treasurer President, Directors, of Board Congress

Bureau Council Congress Presidency countries) different fivefrom Parties Member Associated or Ordinary seven or Presidency, the by (initiated Assembly Political Decision    

No statutes No programme thepolitical and trends, political main laysthe down AEMN of orientation of authority sovereign constitutes the budget the annual adopts General Secretary Assistant Gene Secretary namesthe

maker ral and the the and ral

82 (in general, (ingeneral, specified n votes cast ofthe two m majority qualified s President) ofthevote (casting present members the majorityof a

uper bsolute ot ot ajority of of ajority Voting - thirds thirds

Parliament. Eu ofthe bylegislature least once at ropean ropean        

membership for the conditions not fulfilling Association bodyofthe any of decisions the notby abiding Regulations the Internal or Association not abidin majority) simpleby (Congress terms twofor successive obligations financial not fulfilling membership noncomplian Standingorders the or statutes the of nonrespect itsreasons disclose to not obliged terms parliamentary consecutive two for parliaments regional/national/European in represented (not fo political viable a more not any

    

g by the Articles of Articles gthe by

Reasons

representation) (proportional delegates other observant and members,associated parties Assemblyof ofRegional Members observant and associated members, parties the of Parliament National and ofEuropean Member Assembly ofthe Members party observant or associated each for member Oneassociate theirrepresentatives or Parliament European the at delegation ce with the criteria for criteria with the ce

rce rce

CEU eTD Collection

European European AECR Green Party EAF EFA EDP EL

               

Dismissal exclusion votingrights lossofall exclusion membership of cancellation suspension provisional temporary/ exclusion suspension member) (full votingrights of suspension withdrawal permanent withdrawal temporal suspension information to access of withdrawal meetings EGP in participation withdraw votingrights of withdrawal speakingrights of withdrawal

al ofal

Board Bureau from opinion the ofbasisan Assembly General ofthe Presidency recommendation Council ExecutiveBoard ofthe suggestion Congresson theby ratified Chairpersons; Council Council Committee ofthe proposal Council

on a on

on the the on of the on

on theon

Votes Allocated the majorityof quarters three Votes Allocated the majorityof two cast) thevotes majorityof simply bydecides Bureau simple represented or present members thevoting majo two votes ofthe twothirds majorityof witha consensus) of (basis specified n majority s

imple ot ot - - thirds thirds thirds thirds

rity of

                 

fails to meet its meet its fails to disrepute Party Green into European inact suc non obligations other or criteria membership meet the fail to justified be to notneed does decision gen in Association ofthe values the and theinterest to isacts contrary ofits any when not abiding by the principles and and principles the notby abiding Orders) of Rules members; EFA of duties and Rights 4: duties(Article not perform their do parties when presumably specified; not explicitly commitments theirfinancial meet not who do memberparties party ofthe values and interests the to detrimental way is inthat act a eligibility of conditions the longernorespect acco in ofthe EDP, aninstance by made thedecisions not respect do the internal regulation or EDP of thestatutes not respect do pol and statutes violates seriously va and theinterests against acting membership for the conditions not fulfilling Alliance bodyofthe any of decisions the notby abiding Regulations the Internal Allianceor ofthe Statutes the notby abiding lues of the Alliance in general Alliancein ofthe lues itical aimsitical - payment of membership fees membership of payment rdance withstatutes these rdance

h a way as to bring the the bring wayas to ha

financial obligations financial eral

Internal Internal

CEU eTD Collection Source: A Table MELD AENM Statutes of ECPM EUD European Party European

EPP PES 6.

the European parties European the

     Party finance

exclusion suspension disqualification membership of Termination Dismissal

2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004

EP from Funding

4 117 4 292 276 7 482 6 183 6 959 4 485 3 354 3 414 156 3 914 2 398 2 051 1 3 395 3 100 3 027 3 992 2 580 2 489 2 093 1

Committee Steering from the proposal Assembly Bureau Board Board from the proposal Board

(in EUR)(in 462 708 754 060 941 469 825 715 988 323 000 647 218 000 175 853

on a on

n ot defined/ ot 84 specified n specified n majority simple majority 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 N/A N/A N/A N/A 2011 2010 2009 2008 N/A N/A N/A N/A

ot ot ot

Membership fees Membership

0.9 0.9 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 1.30 1.3 n N/A 1.3 o statutes o

        

“cautelatives reasons” “cautelatives association the prejudices or the resolutions, or the regulations charter, association’s onlyi obligations its fails perform to membership for meet therequirements to ceased Association ofthe membership for the conditions not fulfilling program political of objectives and principles the notby abiding statute ofthe Article 2 of objectives and principles the notby abiding Association ofthe membership for the conditions not fulfilling program political Association’s ofthe objectives and principles the notby abiding statute ofthe Article 2 of objectives

f member acts contrary to the to membercontrary acts f 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 N/A N/A N/A N/A 2011 2010 2009 20 N/A N/A N/A N/A

08 the

Total revenue Total 5.0 4.3 4.0 3.8 4.0 3.5 7.9 6.4 4.9 4.5

Association’s Association’s

CEU eTD Collection

European Green European AECR ALDE Party EDP EL

2005 2004 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 20 2007 2006 2005 2004 2013 2012 2011 2010 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2013 2012 08

883 819 462 352 985 4 313 323 4 217 222 163 571 293 550 598 423 249 407 152 163 253 862 69 947 049 835 846 080 708 405 562 539 536 251 524 019 439 868 365 895 120 596 402 1 913 285 1 478 140 1 164 327 218 563 1 372 333 1 298 1 054 1 643 641 750 631 581 568 461 171 232 2 344 950 1 815 1 553 1 179 1 115 1 022 1

500 563 661 906 946 555 886 084 693 611 571 933 500 936 562 534 000 261

539 999 476 770 984 191 665 344

85 2012 2011 2010 2009 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 2011 2010 2009 2008 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 2005 2004 N/A N/A 2011 2010 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 2011 2010 2009 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.035 N/A

0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.35 0.06 0.03 0.07 0.08 0.2 0.2 0.16

2012 2011 2010 2009 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 2011 2010 2009 2008 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 2005 2004 N/A N/A 2011 2010 N/A N/A N N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 2011 2010 2009 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A /A

1.8 1.7 1.4 1.2 2.2 1.9 1.5 1.5 0.3 0.2 0.7 0.5 1.0 0.9 0.7

CEU eTD Collection ECPM, AENM, MELD do not not do MELD AENM, ECPM, only Danish in available 2007 2006, EUD 2006 EDP items individual decode to is ithard that iswrittenso report the public,or isnot report the either because available, not means N/A: 2009. since only version 2006 reports Left financial European of Party parties http://www.europarl.europa.eu/pdf/grants/grant_amounts_parties_25 award. grant maximum represents year 2013 only award, grant final represent numbers The Source: EU spending on 2004 parties on spending EU Source: Note: * including o including * Note: MELD AENM

ECPM - EUD EAF EFA 2009 french version french 2009

ther resources like reimbursement supplies etc. supplies resourcesreimbursement ther like

2013 2012 2013 2012 2013 2012 2011 2010 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2013 2012 2011 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 have any financial reports available on their websites their on available reports financial any have

339 226 600 226 215 220 813 649 813 482 621 323 385 266 289 305 807 241 852 259 208 242 278 24 259 176 217 700 226 226 323 385 455 360 372 864 438 185 384 395 57 76357 1807

152 600 198 914 012 359 852 069 167 280 753 333 - 2013, (available at: at: (available 2013,

- 2008 are available only in French thus marked as N/A. English English N/A. as thus marked in French only available are 2008 86 N/A N/A N/A N/A 2011 N/A 2009 2008 N/A N/A N/A N/A 2011 N/A N/A 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 200 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

0.025 0.03 0.007 0 0.08 0.06 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.06 .004

- 03

- 2013.pdf

) and web pages of European European of pages )web and

N/A N/A N/A N/A 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 N/A N/A N/A 2011 N/A N/A 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3

CEU eTD Collection Manifesto 1 CLOSING QUESTIONS: so strong, would be smaller for example? 16.Would i 15. What is currentthe position towards Fidesz? doing anything towards Hungarian party Fidesz? Party”. How would you describe such a strong position when it comes PES to party when EPPnot is “distance itself from a such dangerous and u minorities from Slovakia´s Prime Socialist Minister Robert Fico” where you called onthe PES to 14. On March 27, 2013 EPP adopted a “resolution that denounces offensive statements against 13. Are you familiar with the case of Slovak party SMER which was susp CASE STUDIES party? Did it have any impact on the organization? 12. Related question 11. What if memberthe party suddenly became Euroscepti too party. Would you expel/suspend such member? a 10. Hypothetical questions: Let’s say one EPPof member parties makes a coalition with an extremist different countries. Do you recall of Assembly by initiated the Presidency seven or Ordinary Associated or Member Parties from five 9. EPP Statutes says suspension that or exclusion EPP of members decided is by the Political 8. What are sufficientthe conditions for taking any disciplinary DISCIPLINARY MEASURES 7. Who is responsible for this review process? 6. If yes, how it look does like? Can you describe it? criteria for amembership? 5. When parties are already members, is there something like re a MEMBERS evaluate and examine the readiness of parties to enter the European People's Party? 4. 2. other members are 1. APPLICANTS Sem A 7. Can you point out any document that would specify the identity the of organization beyond

PPENDIX Let’s say that anew (Christian democratic) party wants EPP.to join How would Political Assembly How often doyou meet? How your does usual meeting look like? You are member a of i - structured interview questions, EPP

would that beEPP Platform? t bet easier maketo decision a in a similar situation? e.g. party would not bedomestically

? Are they permanent members? -

do you think EPP that somehow changed after British Conservatives left the EPP Working Group on Membership

any such initiative thatcame frommember parties?

nacceptable remarks made by leader the of PES member

(number 3). Can you me tell who c or c or too nationalistic? measures against EPP members? view process of compliance with the

ended from PES in2006?

the

CEU eTD Collection party? 15. Can you point out any document beyond PES Statutes that would specify the identity of wholethe CLOSING QUESTION your opinion, why EPP the notdid take any disciplinarymeasures against Hungarian party Fidesz? 14. What youris opinion on current situation Hungaryin with regard theto governing party Fidesz? In Fidesz? criticism PES the while of theat same time EPP the for instance fails to leader of PES member Party. How would you describe EPP’sstrong position when it comes to Europe minorities from Slovakia’s Socialist Prime Minister Robert Fico where EPP called on the Party of 13. On March 27, 2013 the EPP adopted a resolution that denounces offensive statements against National Party)? the initial reasons for suspension were still present (SMER 12. Inyour opinion, why was SMER accepted back as membera full the of PES in 2008even though SMER? right xe decision to form agovernment with Slovakthe National Party (SNS), which was believed be to “far 11. In Slovak 2006,the SMER CASE STUDIES measures against PES member party? 10. Do you know any about particular reason that would lead to the application of disciplinarthe PESthe expel/suspend such amember? 9. Let’s assume thatone of PESthe member parties makes acoalition with an extremist party. Would PES members? 8. Inyour opinion, what are sufficient the conditions for taking any disciplinary measures again DISCIPLINARY MEASURES 7. Who is responsible for this review process? 6. If yes, how it look does like? Can you describe it? compliance with 5. When national parties are already members of the PES, is there something like a reviewprocess of MEMBERS evaluate and examine the readiness of parties to enter the Party European of Socialists? 4. Let’s assume thatanew (social democratic) party wants to 3. How often do they meet? How the does usual meeting look like? 2. If yes, you can specify who take part in this unit/workinggroup? Socialists (PES)? EPPthe on(WG3 membership). Does some similar struc 1. The European People's Party (EPP) has a specific working group that deals with membership the of APPLICANTS Semi A PPENDIX -

an Socialists distanceto itself from adangerous such and unacceptable remarks made by the nophobic, nationalist party” (Euractiv 2006). What doyou think about the decision to suspend structured interview questions, PES

the criteria for amembership?

- SD party was suspended from Party the European of Socialists for its

ture exist within the Party European of

was still in the coalition with Slovak

join the PES. How would the Presidency

criticize the Hungarian party

st the y